lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chantal Ackermann <chantal.ackerm...@btelligent.de>
Subject AW: Restricting Facet to FilterQuery in combination with mincount
Date Wed, 20 Jan 2010 08:17:58 GMT
Thank you, Chris!

That did clarify it. :-)
Cheers,
Chantal

________________________________________
Von: Chris Hostetter [hossman_lucene@fucit.org]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 19. Januar 2010 23:27
An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Restricting Facet to FilterQuery in combination with mincount

: Now, I was wondering whether it is possible to find that out. It would allow
: to show 0 counts of values that are produced by the query (q), and at the same
: time exclude all facet values that are already excluded by the filter query.
:
: Applying facetting to a subset (subselect / filterset) of the index not to
: everything - that might describe it, as well.

you can "tag" a filter query so that face.tfield knows to ignore that fq
when computing the constraint counts...

http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SimpleFacetParameters#LocalParams_for_faceting

...but i'm pretty sure that still won't give you what you are looking for.
In your "mammal" example it would just mean that the counts for your
"name" facet would ignore the "fq=type:mammal" restriction and be based
purely on the main q=area:water query ... so instead of "excluding"
salmon(0) from the results, and leaving lion(0) and dog(0) you would get
presumably start getting a positive count for "salmon", but lin and dog
still wouldn't match....

: > > q=area:water&fq=type:mammal&facet.field=name&facet.mincount=0
: > >
: > > would return something like
: > > dolphin (20)
: > > blue whale (20)
: > > salmon (0) <= not covered by filter query
: > > lion (0)
: > > dog (0)

...even if you sqaped the fq and q (which would alter your scores
drasticly) what taging and excluding changes is the *counts* associated
with a facet value -- there is no way to get "some zeros" to show while
"other zeros" don't.

Typically the driving force behind something like this is a hierarchical
taxonomy -- your animal example fitting nicely.  In those cases, you can
make your facets use the full hierarch (ie: mammal/lion, mammal/dog,
fish/salmon instead of just lion/dog/salmon) and you can use facet.prefix
to get the type of behavior you are talking about.


-Hoss


Mime
View raw message