Hi Francois,

The issue you describe looks like a similar issue we have fixed before
with matches count.
Open an issue and we can look into it.

Martijn

On 1 May 2012 20:14, Francois Perron
<francois.per...@wantedanalytics.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your response Cody,
>
>  First, I used distributed grouping on 2 shards and I'm sure then all 
> documents of each group are in the same shard.
>
> I take a look on JIRA issue and it seem really similar.  There is the same 
> problem with group.ngroups.  The count is calculated in second pass so we 
> only had result from "useful" shards and it's why when I increase rows limit 
> i got the right count (they must use all my shards).
>
> Except it's a feature (i hope not), I will create a new JIRA issue for this.
>
> Thanks
>
> On 2012-05-01, at 12:32 PM, Young, Cody wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> When you say 2 slices, do you mean 2 shards? As in, you're doing a 
>> distributed query?
>>
>> If you're doing a distributed query, then for group.ngroups to work you need 
>> to ensure that all documents for a group exist on a single shard.
>>
>> However, what you're describing sounds an awful lot like this JIRA issue 
>> that I entered a while ago for distributed grouping. I found that the hit 
>> count was coming only from the shards that ended up having results in the 
>> documents that were returned. I didn't test group.ngroups at the time.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3316
>>
>> If this is a similar issue then you should make a new Jira issue.
>>
>> Cody
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Francois Perron [mailto:francois.per...@wantedanalytics.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:47 AM
>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Grouping ngroups count
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>>  I tried to use grouping with 2 slices with a index of 35K documents.  When 
>> I ask top 10 rows, grouped by filed A, it gave me about 16K groups.  But, if 
>> I ask for top 20K rows, the ngroups property is now at 30K.
>>
>> Do you know why and of course how to fix it ?
>>
>> Thanks.
>



-- 
Met vriendelijke groet,

Martijn van Groningen

Reply via email to