As to point 1 - this is not a problem with the response structure I've
outlined. This is exactly the problem I'm trying to solve. NULL is not a
value in the field, it is a placeholder to indicate how many documents the
field does not exist for. In my example response structure above, 'missing'
is placed outside of the 'facets' list, clearing up the confusion.
'missing' could indeed be a facet value without any collisions.
To point 2 - I understand it would cause compatibility issues, that is why I
was suggesting it be incorporated into the next SOLR release. I'd also be
willing to work
Regarding the stats component, it does not do what you think it does. It
reports a count of all values, not distinct values. The stats component
also strictly works on numeric fields, which would make it impossible to use
in a lot of cases where the FacetComponent does work.
Shalin Shekhar Mangar wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 1:20 AM, smock <harish.agar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd like to propose a change to the facet response structure. Currently,
>> it
>> looks like:
>>
>> {'facet_fields':{'field1':[('value1',count1),('value2',count2),(null,missingCount)]}}
>>
>> My immediate problem with this structure is that null is not of the same
>> type as the 'value's. Also, the meaning of the (null,missingCount) tuple
>> is
>> not the same as the meaning of the ('value',count) tuples, it is a
>> special
>> case to represent the documents for which the field has no value. I'd
>> like
>> to propose changing the response to:
>>
>> {'facet_fields',:{'field1':{'facets':[('value1',count1),('value2',count2)],'missing':missingCount}}}
>>
>>
> Well, there are two problems:
> 1. 'missing' can be a value in the field
> 2. Facet support has been there for a long time. This would break
> compatibility with existing clients.
>
>
>>
>> In addition to cleaning up the 'null' issue mentioned above, I think this
>> will allow for greater flexibility moving forward with the facet
>> component.
>> For instance, it would be great if the FacetComponent could add an
>> optional
>> count of the 'hits', or number of distinct facet values contained in the
>> query result. If the facet request has a limit on it, this number is not
>> available via a count of the returned facet values. The response
>> structure
>> I've outlined above could accomodate this piece of metadata very easily:
>>
>> {'facet_fields',:{'field1':{'facets':[('value1',count1),('value2',count2)],'missing':missingCount,'hits':hitsCount}}}
>>
>>
> Have you looked at StatsComponent? It give counts for total distinct
> values
> and count of documents missing a value among other things:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/StatsComponent
>
> --
> Regards,
> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Facet-Response-Structure-tp25407363p25414267.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
