Hi Sandro, Ah, ok, this is quite simple then - you should be able to sort these any way you like in your client code since the facet data is all there. On the server-side, you can look at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1672 - please note this is an old patch for 1.4, so this won't work on 4.x - but it can give an idea of how/where to do the sorting on the server-side, if you want to go down that road. HTH Peter
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Sandro Zbinden <zbin...@imagic.ch> wrote: > Hi > > @Peter This is actually the requirement. We have. For both sort options > (index, count) we would like to have the possibility to add the desc option. > > Instead of this result > q=*:*&facet=true&facet.field=image_text&facet.sort=index&rows=0 > > <lst name="facet_fields"> > <lst name="image_text"> > <int name="a">12</int> > <int name="b">23</int> > <int name="c">200/int> > </lst> > </lst> > > We would like to add desc to the sort option like facet.sort=index,desc > to get the following result > > <lst name="facet_fields"> > <lst name="image_text"> > <int name="c">200</int> > <int name="b">23</int> > <int name="a">12/int> > </lst> > </lst> > > Bests Sandro > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Peter Sturge [mailto:peter.stu...@gmail.com] > Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. September 2013 11:17 > An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Betreff: Re: Facet sort descending > > Hi, > > This question could possibly be about rare idr facet counting - i.e. > retrun the facets counts with the least values. > I remember doing a patch for this years ago, but then it broke when some > UninvertedField facet optimization came in around ~3.5 time. > It's a neat idea though to have an option to show the 'rarest N' facets > not just the 'top N'. > > Thanks, > Peter > > > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Chris Hostetter > <hossman_luc...@fucit.org>wrote: > > > > > : Is there a plan to add a descending sort order for facet queries ? > > : Best regards Sandro > > > > I don't understand your question. > > > > if you specify multiple facet.query params, then the constraint counts > > are returned in the order they were initially specified -- there is no > > need for server side sorting, because they all come back (as opposed > > to facet.field where the number of constraints can be unbounded and > > you may request just the top X using facet.limit) > > > > If you are asking about facet.field and using facet.sort to specify > > the order of the constraints for each field, then no -- i don't > > believe anyone is currently working on adding options for descending > sort. > > > > I don't think it would be hard to add if someone wanted to ... I just > > don't know that there has ever been enough demand for anyone to look > > into it. > > > > > > -Hoss > > >
