Did my suggestion work out? RE contributing — most people start out with making improvements needed for their application. Alternatively you could look at some of the open issues in JIRA that have the “spatial” or “modules/spatial” component (for Solr or Lucene, respectively). Most of the real spatial stuff is in Lucene-spatial & Spatial4j but some stuff is at the Solr level. Speaking of Spatial4j; it’s an independent project on GitHub, used by Lucene/Solr spatial. If you really like computational geometry and geodesic formulas go there and get on the dev list for it. It’s issues are tracked separately.
~ David Smiley Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Aman Tandon <amantandon...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks David, yeah i want to contribute can you please suggest me that how > should i start to learn deeply about solr spatial, i am new in solr and i > really want to contribute here :) > > Any help will be really appreciated. > > @David Sorry for the late reply. > > With Regards > Aman Tandon > > > On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:36 AM, david.w.smi...@gmail.com < > david.w.smi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Aman, > > > > That’s an interesting feature request that I haven’t heard before. > > > > First reaction: Helliosearch (a fork of Solr that is kept up to date > with > > changes from Solr) is extremely close to supporting such a thing because > it > > supports sorting facets by Helliosearch specific aggregation functions. > > http://heliosearch.org/solr-facet-functions/ However, none of its > > aggregation functions are spatial oriented. If this feature is important > > enough to you, you could very well add it. It would likely involve > > encoding the coordinate into the place name to avoid unnecessary > redundant > > calculations that would be needed if another field were used. > > > > Second reaction: You could do a secondary search just for these facet > > values that works using Result Grouping (AKA Field Collapsing). Add to > each > > document the coordinates of the city indexed using a LatLonType field. > On > > this request, sort the documents using geodist(), and group on the city > > name. Perhaps you can even get away with returning no documents per > group > > if Solr lets you — you don’t need the doc data after all. The main > thing I > > don’t like about this approach is that it’s going to internally calculate > > the distance very redundantly since all documents for a city are going to > > have the coordinate. Well see if it’s fast enough and give it a try. > > > > ~ David Smiley > > Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > > > > > > On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Aman Tandon <amantandon...@gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Is it possible to sort the results return on faceting by geo spatial > > > distance instead of result count. > > > > > > Currently i am faceting on city, which returns me the top facets on > > behalf > > > of the docs matched for that particular city. > > > > > > e.g.: > > > Delhi,400 > > > Noida, 380 > > > . > > > . > > > . > > > etc. > > > > > > If the user selects the city then the facets should be according to the > > geo > > > spatial distance instead of results, Is it possible with the solr > 4.7.x.? > > > > > > With Regards > > > Aman Tandon > > > > > >
