Interesting.... I don't recall a bug like that being fixed.
Anyway, glad it works for you now!
-Yonik
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Chantal Ackermann
<c.ackerm...@it-agenten.com> wrote:
> Hi Yonik,
>
> after upgrading to Solr 6.3.0, the nested function works as expected! (Both
> with and without docValues.)
>
> "facets":{
> "count":3179500,
> "all_pop":1.5901646171168616E8,
> "shop_cat":{
> "buckets":[{
> "val":"Kontaktlinsen > Torische Linsen",
> "count":75168,
> "cat_sum":3752665.0497611803},
>
>
> Thanks,
> Chantal
>
>
>> Am 15.12.2016 um 16:00 schrieb Chantal Ackermann
>> <c.ackerm...@it-agenten.com>:
>>
>> Hi Yonik,
>>
>> are you certain that nesting a function works as documented on
>> http://yonik.com/solr-subfacets/?
>>
>> top_authors:{
>> type: terms,
>> field: author,
>> limit: 7,
>> sort: "revenue desc",
>> facet:{
>> revenue: "sum(sales)"
>> }
>> }
>>
>>
>> I’m getting the feeling that the function is never really executed because,
>> for my index, calling sum() with a non-number field (e.g. a multi-valued
>> string field) throws an error when *not nested* but does *not throw an
>> error* when nested:
>>
>> json.facet={all_pop: "sum(gtin)“}
>>
>> "error":{
>> "trace":“java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException
>> at
>> org.apache.lucene.queries.function.FunctionValues.doubleVal(FunctionValues.java:47)
>>
>> And the following does not throw an error but definitely should if the
>> function would be executed:
>>
>> json.facet={all_pop:"sum(popularity)",shop_cat: {type:terms,
>> field:shop_cat, facet: {cat_pop:"sum(gtin)"}}}
>>
>> returns:
>>
>> "facets":{
>> "count":2815500,
>> "all_pop":1.4065865823321116E8,
>> "shop_cat":{
>> "buckets":[{
>> "val":"Kontaktlinsen > Torische Linsen",
>> "count":75168,
>> "cat_pop":0.0},
>> {
>> "val":"Damen-Mode/Inspirationen",
>> "count":47053,
>> "cat_pop":0.0},
>>
>> For completeness: here is the field directive for „gtin“ with
>> „text_noleadzero“ based on „solr.TextField“:
>>
>> <field name="gtin" type="text_noleadzero" indexed="true" stored="true"
>> required="false" multiValued="true“/>
>>
>>
>> Is this a bug or is the documentation a glimpse of the future? I will try
>> version 6.3.0, now. I was still on 6.1.0 for the above tests.
>> (I have also tried with the „avg“ function, just to make sure, but same
>> there.)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chantal
>
