Jon Bratseth

Why can't you do one query with no exclusions to get all these alternatives?

In your example picture above is a gui which (I believe) shows *all* the options of each facets. That can be produced by *one* query, recalling all documents (or all...

Yes, it will be _one_ query to respond to each new action taken by the user. That is normal and as expected right? And if we assume no state in...

Yes, N user actions give N+1 queries in total (not counting the first user action of opening the page/app). Agree?

Okay, back to the original question: Why does selecting 3 facets take 4 queries (assuming no state in the client)? - You get all choices for all facets by issuing...

> We need to get the 3 aggregations Why, i.e what information do you gain from this that is missing otherwise?

The first query (matching all) will give you all values of facet1, facet2 and facet3.

Yes, but those are subsets. You need the subset matching the current selection (of facet1,2,3), but what do you need the other subsets for?

> Results and non-excluded facet aggregations are coming from query (1) Yes. > Query (2) and (3) are there only to calculate aggregations on excluded facets. Can't you replace 2)...

Yes, 2 Red instead of 1 is an example of the same missing info (however, in that case I don't think it's necessarily better to show 1 than 2 if...