On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Chris Hostetter <hossman_luc...@fucit.org> wrote: > and think that conceptually it > doesn't make sense for facet.missing to consider facet.mincount.
+1 "facet.missing" asks for the missing count - regardless of what it is. Although it might make sense in some use cases to make facet.missing pay attention to mincount, that's tougher to deal with on the client side if it's not the behavior you want. -Yonik http://lucidworks.com
