Now that is quite interesting indeed and sounds like a bug to me. Including facets with a count of 0 we have a few 100k which then apparently get transferred. hmhmhm
Can anyone with more knowledge of the facet component maybe chime in why the miscount is removed? Am Donnerstag, 8. September 2011 um 22:03 schrieb Michael Ryan: > What is happening is that the facet.mincount parameter is removed when the > query is made to the shards, so each shard is returning about 30000 facet > values, most of them with a count of 0. I don't have a complete understanding > of FacetComponent, but it seems like it shouldn't have to do this.
