[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10246?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17561222#comment-17561222
]
Greg Miller edited comment on LUCENE-10246 at 7/1/22 12:27 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------
[~shahrs87] I'd start by becoming familiar with the existing "association
facet" implementations ({{TaxonomyFacetIntAssociations}} and
{{TaxonomyFacetFloatAssociations}} as well as looking at some demo code like
{{AssociationsFacetsExample}}). The API contract they implement represent
results with {{FacetResult}}, which contains a list of {{LabelAndValue}}
instances. {{LabelAndValue}} only models a single label along with a single
numeric value. The value "usually" represents a total faceting count for a
label in "non-association" facets, but with association faceting, value takes
on an aggregated weight "associated" with the label.
The idea with this Jira is to be able to convey _both_ an aggregated weight and
the count associated with a label. The best way to do that without creating a
weird API for non-association cases is something that will probably take a
little thought. Should we just put another "count" field in {{LabelAndValue}}
and have both value and count be populated with a count for non-association
cases? That sounds weird.
So beyond understanding what's currently there, I think the next step is to
think about the right way to evolve the API that doesn't create a weird
interaction for non-association faceting, especially since those are more
commonly used.
Please reach out here as you have questions and I'll do my best to answer in a
timely fashion. Thanks for having a look at this!
was (Author: gsmiller):
[~shahrs87] I'd start by becoming familiar with the existing "association
facet" implementations ({{TaxonomyFacetIntAssociations}} and
{{TaxonomyFacetFloatAssociations}} as well as looking at some demo code like
{{AssociationsFacetsExample}}). The API contract they implement represent
results with {{FacetResult}}, which contains a list of {{LabelAndValue}}
instances. {{LabelAndValue}} only models a single label along with a single
numeric value. The value "usually" represents a total faceting count for a
label in "non-association" facets, but with association faceting, value takes
on an aggregated weight "associated" with the label.
The idea with this Jira is to be able to convey _both_ an aggregated weight and
the count associated with a label. The best way to do that without creating a
weird API for non-association cases is something that will probably take a
little thought. Should we just put another "count" field in {{LabelAndValue}}
and have both value and count be populated with a count for non-assocation
cases? That sounds weird.
So beyond understanding what's currently there, I think the next step is to
think about the right way to evolve the API that doesn't create a weird
interaction for non-association faceting, especially since those are more
commonly used.
> Support getting counts from "association" facets
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-10246
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10246
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: modules/facet
> Reporter: Greg Miller
> Priority: Minor
>
> We have these nice "association" facet implementations today that aggregate
> "weights" from the docs that facet over, but they don't keep track of counts.
> So the user can get "top-n" values for a dim by aggregated weight (great!),
> but can't know how many docs matched each value. It would be nice to support
> this so users could show the top-n values but _also_ show counts associated
> with each.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
