New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Possible BUG: HTTP (JSON) offset and limit affects facet results #652
Comments
I'm seeing the same thing on 3.5.2 so it doesn't appear to be a new issue |
@sanikolaev Do you know if there is any movement on this? Not many of our projects have search pagination (with an emphasis on relevance) but in the rare circumstances we do I've had to write an SQL only version because of this facet issue and it would be nice to know if i should ditch the HTTP JSON API entirely. |
Hi @jlawrence-yellostudio I'll check with the team on how difficult it's to change the behaviour and what we can do in general. |
seems like a bug as each |
I have the same issue with pagination using HTTP API. |
Fixed in 60401eb Note though that when |
Describe the bug
Using the HTTP (JSON) interface, the request
limit
andoffset
(doc) affects the 'aggregations' (facet) results.SQL interface behaves as expected.
To Reproduce
Create and fill the index
HTTP
request with offset and limit:
response (hits are removed for clarity) aggregations.str_val.buckets is empty, but there should be 2 elements:
SQL
The same query in SQL returns the expcted 2 rows in the facet
PHP
The official php api also produces the wrong results: when
->offset()
and->limit()
are used, the->facet('str_val')
resultset is empty (but should have 2 elements).You can examine the facet result as you change the
->offset()
and->limit()
values.Expected behavior
HTTP response aggregations.str_val.buckets should have 2 elements, just like the SQL version.
Describe the environment:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: