Thanks Robert, your code helped me solve a problem I had! Saved me a lot of
time & headaches
cheers, Nico
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/MultiValued-facet-behavior-question-tp3093851p4022375.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archiv
Let me give the full user case... There has been a little
misunderstanding, but really some good discussions...
1. Some Cardiologists are also Family Doctors and Internal Medicine
doctors (Internist).
2. The use case that confuses the users is the output of the query
when using dismax across 2 fie
: And I click on B, does it make sense for the user to display
: B
: C
: E
:
: after the selection ? Just because items in B are C and E items as well?
: As A user I chose B because I'm interested in B items. I do not care if they
: are also C and E items.
: Technically this is correct, but funct
An interesting live scenario for this matter:
http://www.bondfaro.com.br/ (brazilian site)
The query "ipad" returns results spread across many categories (links
on the left, teasers in the center). The "Tablet" category (facet) is
one of them.
The query "tablet" does exactly the same as clicking
Yeah, I agree with that last statement.
It seems to me that the use case where it _might_ matter is where
you have a query for MORE than one.
q=cardiologist OR family
and in that case, it MIGHT be useful to separate the facets
in a XOR sense where you don't get cross-pollution. But
the original
Okay, so since you put "cardiologist" in the 'q', you only want facet
values that have 'cardiologist' (or 'Cardiologist') to show in up the
facet list.
In general, there's no good way to do that.
But.
If you want to do some client-side processing before you submit the
query to Solr, and on t
How is that different from doing a field search and just counting the
results?
If you only want the facet of the searched term (input), then why not just
combine that with the result count and use that?
Facets are more useful when you _don't_ know the distribution of values
across a result set b
We always remove the facet filter when faceting: in other words, for a
good user experience, you generally want to show facets based on the
query excluding any restriction based on the facets.
So in your example (facet B selected), we would continue to show *all*
facets. Only if you performed a
at least, didn't
test :) As I say, it's a very special case for us, and this is in no way
intended to be a general solution or fit for 'prime time' submission as a Solr
enhancement.
Bob Sandiford | Lead Software Engineer | SirsiDynix
P: 800.288.8020 X6943 | bob.sandif...@sirs
Well, the use case is rather simple. It is not a use case but more auser
experience.
If I have a list of values I can facet on, for example :
A
B
C
D
E
And I click on B, does it make sense for the user to display
B
C
E
after the selection ? Just because items in B are C and E items as well?
As A
Hi Dennis,
I think maybe I just disagree. Your not showing facet counts for
cardiologists and Family Doctors independently. The Family Doctor
count will be all Family Doctors who are also Cardiologists.
This allows users to further filter Cardiologists who are also family
Doctors. (this could be
On 06/22/2011 04:01 AM, Dennis de Boer wrote:
Hi Bill,
as far as I understood now, with the help of my friend, you can't.
Multivalued fields don't work that way.
You can however always filter the facet results manually in the JSP. You
knwo what the user chose as a facet.
Yes - that is the m
Hi Lee,
since I have the same problem, I might as well try to answer this question.
You want this behaviour to make things clear for your users. If they select
cardiologists, does it make sense to also show family doctors as a
facetvalue to the user.
The same thing goed for the facets that are re
Hi Bill,
>So that part works. Then when I output the facet, I need a different
>behavior than the default. I need
>The facet to only output the value that matches (scored) - NOT ALL VALUES
>in the multiValued field.
>I think it makes sense?
Why do you need this ? If your use case is faceted navi
Am 22.06.2011 09:49, schrieb Bill Bell:
> You can type q=cardiology and match on cardiologist. If stemming did not
> work you can just add a synonym:
>
> cardiology,cardiologist
Okay, synonyms are the only way I can think of a realistic match.
Stemming won't work on a facet field; you wouldn't g
Hi Bill,
as far as I understood now, with the help of my friend, you can't.
Multivalued fields don't work that way.
You can however always filter the facet results manually in the JSP. You
knwo what the user chose as a facet.
The issue I ran into is when you have additional facet fields. For exam
Hi Bill, can you explain a little bit more around why you need this.
Knowing the motivation
might suggest a different solution not just involving faceting.
On 22 June 2011 08:49, Bill Bell wrote:
> You can type q=cardiology and match on cardiologist. If stemming did not
> work you can just add
You can type q=cardiology and match on cardiologist. If stemming did not
work you can just add a synonym:
cardiology,cardiologist
But that is not the issue. The issue is around multiValue fields and
facets. You would expect a user
Who is searching on the multiValued field to match on some values
Here is an example using exampledocs and trunk 4.0:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=cat:%22hard%20drive%22&version=2.2&sta
rt=0&rows=10&indent=on&facet=true&facet.field=cat&facet.query={!lucene}cat:
%22hard%20drive%22&facet.mincount=1
Results:
Etc
2
2
2
Notice that the fa
Am 22.06.2011 05:37, schrieb Bill Bell:
> It can get more complicated. Here is another example:
>
> q=cardiology&defType=dismax&qf=specialties
>
>
> (Cardiology and cardiologist are stems)...
>
> But I don't really know which value in Cardiologist match perfectly.
>
> Again, I only want it to
Oh sorry forgot to also type:
Often facet fields are not stemmed or heavily analysed. The facet
values are from the index.
On 22 June 2011 08:21, lee carroll wrote:
> Can your front end app normalize the q parameter. Either with a drop
> down or a type a head derived from the values in the speci
Can your front end app normalize the q parameter. Either with a drop
down or a type a head derived from the values in the specialties
field. that way q will match value(s) in your facet results. I'm not
sure what you are trying to achieve though so maybe i'm off the mark.
On 22 June 2011 04:37,
Hi Bill,
yes, you absolutely do make sense. I posted the exact same question to this
mailing list (subject: faceting on multivalued fields), but got no response
out of it. A friend of mine is now helping out.
I hope someone on the list can give us some advice. I'll post our findings
to this topic
Doing it with q=specialities:Cardiologist or
q=Cardiologist&defType=dismax&qf=specialties
does not matter, the issue is how I see facets. I want the facets to only
show the one match,
and not all the multiValued fields in specialties that match...
Example,
Name|specialties
Bell|Cardiologist
Smith
So are you saying that for all results for "cardiologist",
you don't want facets not matching "Cardiologist" to be
returned as facets?
what happens when you make q=specialities:Cardiologist?
instead of just q=Cardiologist?
Seems that if you make the query on the field, then all
your results will
I have a field: specialties that is multiValued.
It indicates the doctor's specialties: cardiologist, internist, etc.
When someone does a search: "Cardiologist", I use
q=cardiologist&defType=dismax&qf=specialties&facet=true&facet.field=specialt
ies
What I want to come out in the facet is the Car
26 matches
Mail list logo
