On 2/5/2015 10:57 AM, Erick Erickson wrote: > Thanks for confirming I'm not completely crazy. > > I don't think it's A Good Thing to _require_ that all ID normalization > be done on the client, it'd have to be done both at index and query > time, too much chance for things to get out of sync. Although I guess > this is _actually_ what happens with the string type. Hmmmm. So I'm > -1 on <2> above as it would require this. > > And having <uniqueKey>s that are text fields _is_ fraught with danger > if you tokenize it, but KeywordTokenizer doesn't.
<snip> > Personally I feel like this is a JIRA, but I can see arguments the > other way as I'm not entirely sure what you'd do if multiple tokens > came out of the analysis chain. Maybe fail the document at index time? > > What _is_ unreasonable IMO is that we allow this surprising behavior, > so regardless of the above I'm +1 on keeping users from being > surprised by this behavior.... My earlier statements were written with the assumption that the current behavior exists because it is difficult to allow the desired behavior. I believe that if it were easy to do, it would have already been done. If it's possible to allow what we both think is rational user expectation (case-insensitive uniqueKey values), I agree that we need to allow it. Whether or not it's readily achievable is the question. Thanks, Shawn --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
