You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to solr-user@lucene.apache.org by "Aigner, Max" <Ma...@nordstrom.com> on 2015/12/10 21:32:55 UTC
RE: JSON facets and excluded queries
Another question popped up around this:
Is the facet.threads parameter still relevant with Json facets? I saw that the facet prefix bug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6686 got fixed in 5.3 so I'm looking into re-enabling this parameter for our searches.
On a side note, I've been testing Json facet performance and I've observed that they're generally faster unless facet prefix filtering comes into play, then they seem to be slower than standard facets.
Is that just a fluke or should I switch to Json Query Facets instead of using facet prefix filtering?
Thanks again,
Max
-----Original Message-----
From: Aigner, Max [mailto:Max.Aigner@nordstrom.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:54 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: JSON facets and excluded queries
Yes, just tried that and it works fine.
That just removed a showstopper for me as my queries contain lots of tagged FQs and multi-select facets (implemented the 'good way' :).
Thank you for the quick help!
-----Original Message-----
From: Yonik Seeley [mailto:yseeley@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:38 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: JSON facets and excluded queries
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Yonik Seeley <ys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Aigner, Max <Ma...@nordstrom.com> wrote:
>> Thanks, this is great :=))
>>
>> I hadn't seen the domain:{excludeTags:...} syntax yet and it doesn't seem to be working on 5.3.1 so I'm assuming this is work slated for 5.4 or 6. Did I get that right?
>
> Hmmm, the "domain" keyword was added for 5.3 along with block join
> faceting: http://yonik.com/solr-nested-objects/
> That's when I switched "excludeTags" to also be under the "domain" keyword.
>
> Let me try it out...
Ah, I messed up that migration...
OK, for now, instead of
domain:{excludeTags:foo}
just use
excludeTags:foo
and it should work.
-Yonik
RE: JSON facets and excluded queries
Posted by "Aigner, Max" <Ma...@nordstrom.com>.
Good to know, thank you.
From an implementation standpoint that makes a lot of sense.
We are only using facets of type 'term' for now and for those it works nicely. Our usual searches carry around 8-12 facets so we are covered from that side :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerickson@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2015 3:12 PM
To: solr-user <so...@lucene.apache.org>
Subject: Re: JSON facets and excluded queries
Do note that the number of threads also won't help much last I knew unless you are faceting over that many fields too. I.e. setting this to 5 while faceting on only 1 field won't help.
And it's not implemented for all facet types IIRC.
Best,
Erick
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Aigner, Max <Ma...@nordstrom.com> wrote:
> Answering one question myself after doing some testing on 5.3.1:
>
> Yes, facet.threads is still relevant with Json facets.
>
> We are seeing significant gains as we are increasing the number of threads from 1 up to 4. Beyond that we only observed marginal improvements -- which makes sense because the test VM has 4 cores.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aigner, Max [mailto:Max.Aigner@nordstrom.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 12:33 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JSON facets and excluded queries
>
> Another question popped up around this:
> Is the facet.threads parameter still relevant with Json facets? I saw that the facet prefix bug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6686 got fixed in 5.3 so I'm looking into re-enabling this parameter for our searches.
>
> On a side note, I've been testing Json facet performance and I've observed that they're generally faster unless facet prefix filtering comes into play, then they seem to be slower than standard facets.
> Is that just a fluke or should I switch to Json Query Facets instead of using facet prefix filtering?
>
> Thanks again,
> Max
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aigner, Max [mailto:Max.Aigner@nordstrom.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:54 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JSON facets and excluded queries
>
> Yes, just tried that and it works fine.
>
> That just removed a showstopper for me as my queries contain lots of tagged FQs and multi-select facets (implemented the 'good way' :).
>
> Thank you for the quick help!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yonik Seeley [mailto:yseeley@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:38 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: JSON facets and excluded queries
>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Yonik Seeley <ys...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Aigner, Max <Ma...@nordstrom.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks, this is great :=))
>>>
>>> I hadn't seen the domain:{excludeTags:...} syntax yet and it doesn't seem to be working on 5.3.1 so I'm assuming this is work slated for 5.4 or 6. Did I get that right?
>>
>> Hmmm, the "domain" keyword was added for 5.3 along with block join
>> faceting: http://yonik.com/solr-nested-objects/
>> That's when I switched "excludeTags" to also be under the "domain" keyword.
>>
>> Let me try it out...
>
> Ah, I messed up that migration...
> OK, for now, instead of
> domain:{excludeTags:foo}
> just use
> excludeTags:foo
> and it should work.
>
> -Yonik
Re: JSON facets and excluded queries
Posted by Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>.
Do note that the number of threads also won't help much last I knew unless you
are faceting over that many fields too. I.e. setting this to 5 while faceting on
only 1 field won't help.
And it's not implemented for all facet types IIRC.
Best,
Erick
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Aigner, Max <Ma...@nordstrom.com> wrote:
> Answering one question myself after doing some testing on 5.3.1:
>
> Yes, facet.threads is still relevant with Json facets.
>
> We are seeing significant gains as we are increasing the number of threads from 1 up to 4. Beyond that we only observed marginal improvements -- which makes sense because the test VM has 4 cores.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aigner, Max [mailto:Max.Aigner@nordstrom.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 12:33 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JSON facets and excluded queries
>
> Another question popped up around this:
> Is the facet.threads parameter still relevant with Json facets? I saw that the facet prefix bug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6686 got fixed in 5.3 so I'm looking into re-enabling this parameter for our searches.
>
> On a side note, I've been testing Json facet performance and I've observed that they're generally faster unless facet prefix filtering comes into play, then they seem to be slower than standard facets.
> Is that just a fluke or should I switch to Json Query Facets instead of using facet prefix filtering?
>
> Thanks again,
> Max
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aigner, Max [mailto:Max.Aigner@nordstrom.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:54 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: JSON facets and excluded queries
>
> Yes, just tried that and it works fine.
>
> That just removed a showstopper for me as my queries contain lots of tagged FQs and multi-select facets (implemented the 'good way' :).
>
> Thank you for the quick help!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yonik Seeley [mailto:yseeley@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:38 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: JSON facets and excluded queries
>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Yonik Seeley <ys...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Aigner, Max <Ma...@nordstrom.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks, this is great :=))
>>>
>>> I hadn't seen the domain:{excludeTags:...} syntax yet and it doesn't seem to be working on 5.3.1 so I'm assuming this is work slated for 5.4 or 6. Did I get that right?
>>
>> Hmmm, the "domain" keyword was added for 5.3 along with block join
>> faceting: http://yonik.com/solr-nested-objects/
>> That's when I switched "excludeTags" to also be under the "domain" keyword.
>>
>> Let me try it out...
>
> Ah, I messed up that migration...
> OK, for now, instead of
> domain:{excludeTags:foo}
> just use
> excludeTags:foo
> and it should work.
>
> -Yonik
RE: JSON facets and excluded queries
Posted by "Aigner, Max" <Ma...@nordstrom.com>.
Answering one question myself after doing some testing on 5.3.1:
Yes, facet.threads is still relevant with Json facets.
We are seeing significant gains as we are increasing the number of threads from 1 up to 4. Beyond that we only observed marginal improvements -- which makes sense because the test VM has 4 cores.
-----Original Message-----
From: Aigner, Max [mailto:Max.Aigner@nordstrom.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 12:33 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: JSON facets and excluded queries
Another question popped up around this:
Is the facet.threads parameter still relevant with Json facets? I saw that the facet prefix bug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6686 got fixed in 5.3 so I'm looking into re-enabling this parameter for our searches.
On a side note, I've been testing Json facet performance and I've observed that they're generally faster unless facet prefix filtering comes into play, then they seem to be slower than standard facets.
Is that just a fluke or should I switch to Json Query Facets instead of using facet prefix filtering?
Thanks again,
Max
-----Original Message-----
From: Aigner, Max [mailto:Max.Aigner@nordstrom.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:54 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: JSON facets and excluded queries
Yes, just tried that and it works fine.
That just removed a showstopper for me as my queries contain lots of tagged FQs and multi-select facets (implemented the 'good way' :).
Thank you for the quick help!
-----Original Message-----
From: Yonik Seeley [mailto:yseeley@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:38 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: JSON facets and excluded queries
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Yonik Seeley <ys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Aigner, Max <Ma...@nordstrom.com> wrote:
>> Thanks, this is great :=))
>>
>> I hadn't seen the domain:{excludeTags:...} syntax yet and it doesn't seem to be working on 5.3.1 so I'm assuming this is work slated for 5.4 or 6. Did I get that right?
>
> Hmmm, the "domain" keyword was added for 5.3 along with block join
> faceting: http://yonik.com/solr-nested-objects/
> That's when I switched "excludeTags" to also be under the "domain" keyword.
>
> Let me try it out...
Ah, I messed up that migration...
OK, for now, instead of
domain:{excludeTags:foo}
just use
excludeTags:foo
and it should work.
-Yonik