On Sep 3, 2006, at 7:33 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
: : One thing that my facet code does is compute the count for all
items
: : that have _no_ terms in a particular field, and makes an
: : <unspecified> count as well. It does this by putting all
documents
: : found into a DocSet as it iterates through all terms for a
field, and
: : then .andNot'ing it away from an all docs query. Not pretty, but
: : does work and works quite fast.
when i went to add this, it occured to me that it was probably just
easier
toget the DocSet for "field:[* TO *]" and andNot that with the main
set of
matches -- it means conputing one additional (large) DocSet for
each field
- but for fields with a lot of terms it should be a lot faster then
doing
one andNot per term. ... and i'm 99.9999% sure it's functionaly
equivilent (right?)
Yeah, I believe it's equivalent. I just haven't gotten used to the
[* TO *] option, so overlooked it. I only do one .andNot per field,
though, not per term. Though I do a .union per term. It is bound to
be quicker with your approach. I look forward to deprecating my work
for this :)
(this only works for "facet fields" like this of course ... if/when we
have arbitrarily complex "facets" defined by a set of rules
implemented as
queries we'd certainly need the DocSet.andNot approach)
Good point.
Erik
