fix(search): author facet counts - #1164
Conversation
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
Important Approval pendingCodeRabbit has no unresolved comments, but it has not reviewed the latest commit. Use the checkbox below to review the latest commit. CodeRabbit will approve the changes if it finds no blocking issues.
WalkthroughThe change adds Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
jma
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please add more details in your commit message.
31c6366 to
de80730
Compare
e41371b to
94108f2
Compare
94108f2 to
68bfccb
Compare
* Add configurable size and shard size defaults for terms aggregations. * Apply them recursively to RECORDS_REST_FACETS while preserving explicit values. * Build project TermsFacet definitions from the application configuration. * Allow deployments to override both values without redefining the facets. * Add tests for the records-rest aggregation configuration. * Closes rero#926 Co-Authored-by: Ana Gomes <anagoncalves7@icloud.com>
68bfccb to
2a6d284
Compare
fix(search): author facet countsElasticsearch builds terms facet counts by merging candidate terms returned
by each shard. With a facet size of 50 and no explicit
shard_size, eachshard returns only 85 candidates. Globally relevant terms can therefore be
omitted on some shards, causing their final counts to be underestimated.
Project facets use
TermsFacetobjects frominvenio-records-resourcesinstead of the dictionaries defined in
RECORDS_REST_FACETS. They thereforecannot be configured by the recursive records-rest implementation.
values.
Closes #926
Warning
Should be tested on the production data as well