Hi Erik,
Thanks for your reply. That's an interesting idea doing it at index-time, and a good idea for known field combinations. The only thing is........ How to handle arbitrary field combinations? - i.e. to allow the caller to specify any combination of fields at query-time? So, yes, the data is available at index-time, but the combination isn't (short of creating fields for every possible combination). Peter > From: erik.hatc...@gmail.com > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Aggregated facet value counts? > Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:30:27 -0500 > > When faced with this type of situation where the data is entirely > available at index-time, simply create an aggregated field that glues > the two pieces together, and facet on that. > > Erik > > On Jan 29, 2010, at 6:16 AM, Peter S wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I was wondering if anyone had come across this use case, and if this > > type of faceting is possible: > > > > > > > > The requirement is to build a query such that an aggregated facet > > count of common (and'ed) field values form the basis of each > > returned facet count. > > > > > > > > For example: > > > > Let's say I have a number of documents in an index with, among > > others, the fields 'host' and 'user': > > > > > > > > Doc1 host:machine_1 user:user_1 > > > > Doc2 host:machine_1 user:user_2 > > > > Doc3 host:machine_1 user:user_1 > > > > Doc3 host:machine_1 user:user_1 > > > > > > > > Doc4 host:machine_2 user:user_1 > > > > Doc5 host:machine_2 user:user_1 > > > > Doc6 host:machine_2 user:user_4 > > > > > > > > Doc7 host:machine_1 user:user_4 > > > > > > > > Is it possible to get facets back that would give the count of > > documents that have common host AND user values (preferably ordered > > - i.e. host then user for this example, so as not to create a > > factorial explosion)? Note that the caller wouldn't know what > > machine and user values exist, only the field names. > > > > I've tried using facet queries in various ways to see if they could > > work for this, but I believe facet queries work on a different plane > > than this requirement (narrowing the term count, a.o.t. aggregating). > > > > > > > > For the example above, the desired result would be: > > > > > > > > machine_1/user_1 (3) > > > > machine_1/user_2 (1) > > > > machine_1/user_4 (1) > > > > > > > > machine_2/user_1 (2) > > > > machine_2/user_4 (1) > > > > > > > > Has anyone had a need for this type of faceting and found a way to > > achieve it? > > > > > > > > Many thanks, > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > We want to hear all your funny, exciting and crazy Hotmail stories. > > Tell us now > > http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/ > _________________________________________________________________ Tell us your greatest, weirdest and funniest Hotmail stories http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/
