The term histograms are shared in this link. Sorry for the confusion. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1tma4hkYjxJfBTnMbO6Pq_dUHqZ0wI_UTlgoVqXtW4ZA/pub?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000&slide=id.p
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Anshum Gupta <ans...@anshumgupta.net> > wrote: > >> Hi Lei, >> >> The mailing list doesn't allow attachments. Can you share these via a file >> sharing platform? >> >> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 12:48 AM, lei <simpl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > The Solr instance is single-shard. Index size is around 20G and total >> doc >> > # is about 12 million. Below are the histograms for the three facet >> fields >> > in my query. Thanks. >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Toke Eskildsen <t...@statsbiblioteket.dk >> > >> > wrote: >> > >> >> On Thu, 2015-03-05 at 21:14 +0100, lei wrote: >> >> >> >> You present a very interesting observation. I have not noticed what you >> >> describe, but on the other hand we have not done comparative speed >> >> tests. >> >> >> >> > q=*:*&fq=country:"US"&fq=category:112 >> >> >> >> First observation: Your query is '*:*, which is a "magic" query. Non-DV >> >> faceting has optimizations both for this query (although that ought to >> >> be disabled due to the fq) and for the "inverse" case where there are >> >> more hits than non-hits. Perhaps you could test with a handful of >> >> queries, which has different result sizes? >> >> >> >> > &facet=on&facet.sort=index&facet.mincount=1&facet.limit=2000 >> >> >> >> The combination of index order and a high limit might be an >> explanation: >> >> When resolving the Strings of the facet result, non-DV will perform >> >> ordinal-lookup, which is fast when done in monotonic rising order >> >> (sort=index) and if the values are close (limit=2000). I do not know if >> >> DV benefits the same way. >> >> >> >> On the other hand, your limit seems to apply only to material, so it >> >> could be that the real number of unique values is low and you just set >> >> the limit to 2000 to be sure you get everything? >> >> >> >> > &facet.field=manufacturer&facet.field=seller&facet.field=material >> >> > >> >> >> &f.manufacturer.facet.mincount=1&f.manufacturer.facet.sort=count&f.manufacturer.facet.limit=100 >> >> > >> >> >> &f.seller.facet.mincount=1&f.seller.facet.sort=count&f.seller.facet.limit=100 >> >> > &f.material.facet.mincount=1&sort=score+desc >> >> >> >> How large is your index in bytes, how many documents does it contain >> and >> >> is it single-shard or cloud? Could you paste the loglines containing >> >> "UnInverted field", which describes the number of unique values and >> size >> >> of your facet fields? >> >> >> >> - Toke Eskildsen, State and University Library, Denmark >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Anshum Gupta >> > >
