The @ is used to say "the next thing is a core name"
If we require a the core name for every request (when MultiCore is
enabled) then this would go away.
I get the feeling this is the best way to go.
ryan
Noble Paul ??????? ?????? wrote:
I cannot see the value add of the /@<corename? over /<corename>
And '@' is not a friendly URL character
--Noble
On Dec 11, 2007 8:05 PM, Ryan McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Henrib wrote:
To be honest, I am not a big fan of the '/@corename' syntax ; I feel the
'?core=corename' syntax carries less surprise and may be extended more
easily (Stu's comment in solr-350).
I've uploaded a small patch to solr-350 (solr-350.patch) so the core as a
request parameter works again (& passes the core as a request attribute
after it has been resolved).
There are two problems with ?core=xxx
1. For some requests (multipart?), calling req.getReqeustParameter(
"core" ) mucks up the whole request
2. Philosophically, there is something off about having different paths
available based on a request parameter. Consider core0 with a handler
registered at /path but core1 does not:
http://host/path?core=core0 [200 OK]
http://host/path?core=core1 [404 Not Found]
ryan
