Since you are faceting on a text field (is this correct?) you deal with a lot of unique values in it. So your best bet is enum method. Also if you are on solr 4x try building doc values in the index: this suits faceting well.
Otherwise start from your spec once again. Can you use shingles instead? On 19 Nov 2013 17:44, "Lemke, Michael SZ/HZA-ZSW" <lemke...@schaeffler.com> wrote: > On Friday, November 15, 2013 11:22 AM, Lemke, Michael SZ/HZA-ZSW wrote: > > Judging from numerous replies this seems to be a tough question. > Nevertheless, I'd really appreciate any help as we are stuck. > We'd really like to know what in our index causes the facet.method=fc > query to fail. > > Thanks, > Michael > > >On Thu, November 14, 2013 7:26 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: > >>On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Lemke, Michael SZ/HZA-ZSW > >><lemke...@schaeffler.com> wrote: > >>> I am running into performance problems with faceted queries. > >>> If I do a > >>> > >>> > q=word&facet.field=CONTENT&facet=true&facet.limit=10&facet.mincount=1&facet.method=fc&facet.prefix=a&rows=0 > >>> > >>> I am getting an exception: > >>> org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Too many values for > UnInvertedField faceting on field CONTENT > >>> at > org.apache.solr.request.UnInvertedField.uninvert(UnInvertedField.java:384) > >>> at > org.apache.solr.request.UnInvertedField.<init>(UnInvertedField.java:178) > >>> at > org.apache.solr.request.UnInvertedField.getUnInvertedField(UnInvertedField.java:839) > >>> ... > >>> > >>> I understand it's got something to do with a 24bit limit somewhere > >>> in the code but I don't understand enough of it to be able to construct > >>> a specialized index that can be queried with facet.method=enum. > >> > >>You shouldn't need to do anything differently to try facet.method=enum > >>(just replace facet.method=fc with facet.method=enum) > > > >This is true and facet.method=enum does work indeed. The problem is > >runtime. In particular queries with an empty facet.prefix= run many > >seconds if not minutes. I initially asked about this here: > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/201310.mbox/%3c33ec3398272fbe47b64ee3b3e98f69a761427...@de011521.schaeffler.com%3E > > > >It was suggested that fc is much faster than enum and I'd like to > >test that. We are still fairly free to design the index such that > >it performs well. But to do that we need to understand what is > >killing it. > > > >> > >>You may also want to add the parameter > >>facet.enum.cache.minDf=100000 > >>to lower memory usage by only usiing the filter cache for terms that > >>match more than 100K docs. > > > >That helped a little, cut down my particular test from 10 sec to 5 sec. > >But still too slow. Mind you this is for an autosuggest feature. > > > >Thanks for your reply. > > > >Michael > > > > > >
