The additional work is done in the QueryComponent I believe. There is a flag that tells the QueryComponent if the DocSet is needed. If that's set to true and it's not available it will build the DocSet.
We ran into the facet refinement issue I mentioned at Alfresco and I created this ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8092. Fixing this problem would likely resolve your scenario as well. I haven't broken ground on it yet though. Joel Bernstein http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:52 PM, ronbraun <ronbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the explanation, Joel. When you say the query/collapse needs to > be re-run, is this the facet component that needs to do this? The > confusing > part is that the debug suggests the time is being spent in the query > component when faceting is enabled. My naive reading of your response > would > give me the expectation that by enabling facets with facet=true, the facet > component would need to do additional work and so the qTime cost would be > paid by that component. Here is the debug I get for repeated hits against > /default?indent=on&q=*:*&wt=json&fq={!collapse+field=groupid}&facet=true& > debugQuery=on: > > "process": { > "time": 200.0, > "query": { "time": 200.0 }, > "facet": { "time": 0.0 }, > "facet_module": { "time": 0.0 }, > "mlt": { "time": 0.0 }, > "highlight": { "time": 0.0 }, > "stats": { "time": 0.0 }, > "expand": { "time": 0.0 }, > "terms": { "time": 0.0 }, > "debug": { "time": 0.0 } > } > > Or perhaps the facet component uses the query component to rerun the query > and the time is billed to that component? > > Regardless, is the lack of caching a known and ticketed issue? The > consensus across various other solr tickets regarding grouped search seems > to be to prefer the collapse/expand approach to grouping. I'm using > non-grouped search now but would like to switch to grouped and > collapse/expand could work for my use case, but the effective defeat of > query caching for any faceted application seems pretty problematic and I'd > be hesitant to switch over if I'm effectively losing query caching by doing > so. My query cache hit rate is reasonably high. > > Thanks! > > Ron > > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3. > nabble.com/Field-collapsing-facets-and-qtime-caching- > issue-tp4319759p4320114.html > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
