Should be fixed now, thanks to Hoss Man. I'll wait for Solr 4.10.4

Thanks,
Marius

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea
<mariusdumitru.flo...@xwiki.com> wrote:
> I started having the same issue (facets being listed twice) after
> upgrading from Solr 4.8.1 to Solr 4.10.3.
> So it looks like a regression to me. I commented on SOLR-6780 as the
> Fix Version/s field is not correct. The fix was not merged correctly
> on the 4.10 branch (before the 4.10.3 release).
>
> I hope we can get this issue fixed on the next 4.10.x version.
>
> Thanks,
> Marius
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Burke, Brian <bbu...@techtarget.com> wrote:
>> Good to hear you can reproduce it and thank you for entering that issue into 
>> JIRA.  FWIW, here is the full list of parameters from echoParams=all from my 
>> test:
>>
>>
>>     "params":{
>>       "mlt.minwl":"2",
>>       "mm":"5",
>>       "facet":"true",
>>       "mlt.boost":"true",
>>       "mlt.fl":"title,summary,body",
>>       "facet.mincount":"1",
>>       "mlt.mintf":"2",
>>       "f.typedef.facet.limit":"15",
>>       "mlt.qf":"title^5 summary^3 body^1",
>>       "mlt.maxqt":"8",
>>       "f.subtype.facet.limit":"15",
>>       "mlt.mindf":"3",
>>       "echoParams":"all",
>>       "df":"id",
>>       "mlt.count":"3",
>>       "facet.field":"primaryId",
>>       "facet":"true",
>>       "echoParams":"all",
>>       "indent":"true",
>>       "q":"*:*",
>>       "facet.limit":"10",
>>       "facet.field":"primaryId",
>>       "wt":"json",
>>       "rows":"0"}},
>>
>> Also, our testing is for an upgrade from solr 4.4 to solr 4.10.2.  I found 
>> that in our current production 4.4 instance, the params shows the duplicate 
>> (facet.field listed twice), but the actual results only has one set of 
>> facets.  Guessing there must have been some code on the output side that was 
>> removing the duplicates in that version of solr.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Brian
>>
>>
>> On Nov 24, 2014, at 6:04 AM, Alexandre Rafalovitch 
>> <arafa...@gmail.com<mailto:arafa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I can reproduce it.
>>
>> I added your parameters to the default section of the config and then
>> run the following:
>> curl 
>> "http://localhost:8983/solr/schemaless/select?q=*:*&rows=0&wt=json&indent=true&facet=true&facet.field=primaryId2&facet.limit=10&echoParams=all";
>>
>> I get:
>> ------------------
>>   "params":{
>>      "f.typedef.facet.limit":"15",
>>      "facet.field":"primaryId2",
>>      "df":"_text",
>>      "f.subtype.facet.limit":"15",
>>      "echoParams":"all",
>>      "facet.mincount":"1",
>>      "rows":"0",
>>      "facet":"true",
>>      "q":"*:*",
>>      "facet.limit":"10",
>>      "facet.field":"primaryId2",
>>      "indent":"true",
>>      "echoParams":"all",
>>      "rows":"0",
>>      "wt":"json",
>>      "facet":"true"}},
>> ------------------
>>
>> This is against Solr 5 build, but I think that bug is there all the
>> way to Solr 4.1. I think I traced the source of the bug too (parameter
>> and default names are just joined together but with the first
>> (override) value both times as shown above). Usually makes no
>> difference to anything, but it looks like faceting component iterates
>> over the elements, not just gets them, so it gets bitten twice.
>>
>> I've created a JIRA for this issue:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6780
>>
>> Regards,
>>   Alex.
>> Personal: http://www.outerthoughts.com/ and @arafalov
>> Solr resources and newsletter: http://www.solr-start.com/ and @solrstart
>> Solr popularizers community: https://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=6713853
>>
>>
>> On 21 November 2014 at 18:29, Alexandre Rafalovitch <arafa...@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> Could you add echoParams=all to the query and see what comes back?
>> Currently, you echo the params you sent, would be good to see what
>> they look like after they combine with defaults.
>>
>> Regards,
>>  Alex.
>> Personal: http://www.outerthoughts.com/ and @arafalov
>> Solr resources and newsletter: http://www.solr-start.com/ and @solrstart
>> Solr popularizers community: https://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=6713853
>>
>>
>> On 21 November 2014 18:04, Tom Zimmermann <zimm.to...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Brian and I are working together to diagnose this issue so I can chime in
>> quickly here as well. These values are defined as part of the the defaults
>> section of the config.
>>

Reply via email to