Shouldn't you build an Or-filter or do you want to match results on all?

Hi Johan, I believe I have these set up correctly.  Regardless, I tried with an Or-filter and the problem remains, the count advertised vs. actual is still not correct.

Which properties are you looking at when rendering? I also think the order might matter. Have you tried calling Filter() after TermsFacetFor()?

I swapped the calls but it hasn't seemed to have made a difference.  I'm still seeing the inaccurate counts.

I'm not sure what you mean by what properties I'm looking at while rendering.  Here is how I'm getting the data about facets back out of the search to pass to the client, if that's helpful:

                public Dictionary<string, int> GetManufacturerCounts(IContentResult<SiteProductVariation> results)
		{
			Dictionary<string, int> facetResults = new Dictionary<string, int>();
			var facetItems = results.TermsFacetFor(r => r.ManufacturerId);
			foreach (var item in facetItems)
			{
				facetResults.Add(item.Term.Replace('-', ' '), item.Count);
			}
			return facetResults;
		}

After this runs the resulting dictionary is just put in an object with the name of the filter and a set of list items which is all passed to the client as an object to render:

		public Facet GetManufacturerFacet(IContentResult<SiteProductVariation> dataList)
		{
			var manufacturerFilter = search.GetManufacturerCounts(dataList);
			
			List<System.Web.UI.WebControls.ListItem> items = manufacturerFilter
				.Select(m => new System.Web.UI.WebControls.ListItem { Text = m.Key, Value = m.Key })
				.ToList();
			Facet facet = new Facet()
			{
				Title = "Manufacturer",
				Name = "ManufacturerId",
				Items = items,
				ApplicableResults = manufacturerFilter.Values.ToList()
			};
			return facet;
		}

Does this answer your questions?

Yes, item.Count is what I meant. What type of objects are you querying? Are they Epi Content, the problem might be in using FilterForVisitor() or not or GetContentResult() vs. GetResult().

You could also check the HTTP traffic using Fiddler and compare with the search view in Find UI for more clues.

Are you hitting the default facet size limit?

--

By default, only 10 facets will be returned. To increase this use:

.TermsFacetFor(x => x.Category, facet => facet.Size = 25)

Answer from:

http://world.episerver.com/Forum/Developer-forum/EPiServer-Search/Thread-Container/2014/2/Not-returning-all-facet-results/

@Johan,

I am querying a class that inherits from the Episerver Commerce VariationContent class.  If I follow that down it does inherit from ContentData.  I am using GetContentResult to execute the search, as you can see here:

		protected virtual IContentResult<T> ExecuteSearch(out int totalResults, double relevancyThreshold = 0, int displayStart = 0, int displayLength = 10)
		{
			var search = EpiFindSearch.Skip(displayStart).Take(displayLength).FilterOnReadAccess().FilterForVisitor();
			var resultSet = search.Track().GetContentResult();
			totalResults = resultSet.TotalMatching;
			return resultSet;
		}

I tried removing the filter on read and for visitor just to see if this had an effect based on your suggestion but it did not.  I have noticed that when the numbers are different the actual results have always been more than the expected.  I'm not sure if that's pointing to filtering as the issue.  I can look into Fiddler, but I'm not sure exactly what I should be looking for.

@Mike,

The question isn't really about the number of facets, but rather the facet counts that are returned when I filter on that facet.  Please see my post above.

As a part of an unrelated bug I was working on, I enlarged the facet size returned to 50, rather than the default of ten.  However, when I tested this, I noticed that the counts were now accurate on each of the facets.  I'm not sure how the number of facets returned is related to the count of results for each facet, so I'd be interested if someone could explain that, but I believe I have solved my original problem.  Thank you both for your help.

Another easy thing to try is to clear the index and also make sure that there aren't multiple consuming apps introducing "corruption" or unnecessary data in the index.