Damien, I gathered that you're using "nested facet"; but there are a lot of different ways to do that, with different implications. e.g., nesting terms facet within terms facet, query facet within terms, terms within query, different stats, sorting, overrequest/overrefine (and for that matter, refine:none|simple, or even distirbuted vs. non-distributed), etc. I was wondering if you could share an example of an actual json facet specification.
Pending more information, I can say that I've been independently looking into this also. I think high filterCache usage can result if you're using terms faceting that results in a lot of refinement requests (either a high setting for overrefine, or low/unevenly-distributed facet counts (as might happen with high-cardinality fields). I think nested terms could also magnify the effect of high-cardinality fields, increasing the number of buckets needing refinement. You could see if setting refine:none helps (though of course it could have undesirable effects on the actual results). But afaict every term specified in a refinement request currently hits the filterCache: https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/40e2122/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/search/facet/FacetProcessor.java#L418 A word of caution regarding the JSON facet `cacheDf` param: although it's currently undocumented in the refGuide, I believe it's only respected at all in FacetFieldProcessorByEnumTermsStream, which is only invoked under certain circumstances (and only when sort=index). So this is unlikely to help (though it's impossible to say without more specific information about the actual requests you're trying to run). Michael On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:52 AM <dami...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Im dong a nested facet ( > https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_6/json-facet-api.html#nested-facets) > or sub-facets, and am using the 'terms' facet. > > Digging around more looks like I can set 'cacheDf=-1' to disable the use of > the cache. > > On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 at 00:14, Michael Gibney <mich...@michaelgibney.net> > wrote: > > > Damien, > > Are you able to share the actual json.facet request that you're using > > (at least just the json.facet part)? I'm having a hard time being > > confident that I'm correctly interpreting when you say "a json.facet > > query on nested facets terms". > > Michael > > > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 3:52 AM Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ > > LONDON) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Damien, > > > > > > You mention about JSON term facets, I haven't explored w.r.t. that but > > we have observed what you describe for JSON range facets and I've started > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14939 about it. > > > > > > Hope that helps. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Christine > > > > > > From: solr-user@lucene.apache.org At: 10/22/20 01:07:59To: > > solr-user@lucene.apache.org > > > Subject: json.facet floods the filterCache > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm using a json.facet query on nested facets terms and am seeing very > > high > > > filterCache usage. Is it possible to somehow control this? With a fq it's > > > possible to specify fq={!cache=false}... but I don't see a similar thing > > > json.facet. > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > Damien > > > > > > > >
