Hi, >I would like the counts.
I agree. I guess this feature doesn't make much sense without the counts. >1, 2, and 4 seem like >bad ideas >1 undercuts the idea that we'd use lucene/solr to get decent >performance. Sorry I don't understand... This is just about the API to retrieve the data. It still uses Lucene/Solr (the same as all other options). I'm not sure if you talk about the performance overhead of converting the facet data to a string and back? This performance overhead is very very small (I assume not measurable). Regards, Thomas
