[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13272?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16818022#comment-16818022
]
Ishan Chattopadhyaya commented on SOLR-13272:
---------------------------------------------
That looks very similar to Elasticsearch's syntax,
https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/6.4/search-aggregations-bucket-range-aggregation.html
So, on the upside, your suggestion will faciliate familiarity for users. Also,
inclusive_to feels more intuituve than include={true, false}. I don't think
users would reasonably want to not include the from/start value, so providing
an option for that seems more potential confusion than useful.
Having said that, my favourite format still is "[200, 300}", which I see that
Apoorv has also supported in his latest update to the PR. This is succinct and
unambiguous.
[~mkhludnev], [[email protected]], any preference on [~janhoy]'s suggestion as
opposed to start/end/include={true,false}?
> Interval facet support for JSON faceting
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-13272
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-13272
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Components: Facet Module
> Reporter: Apoorv Bhawsar
> Priority: Major
> Time Spent: 2.5h
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Interval facet is supported in classical facet component but has no support
> in json facet requests.
> In cases of block join and aggregations, this would be helpful
> Assuming request format -
> {code:java}
> json.facet={pubyear:{type : interval,field :
> pubyear_i,intervals:[{key:"2000-2200",value:"[2000,2200]"}]}}
> {code}
>
> PR https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/597
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
