[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8220?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15033868#comment-15033868
]
Yonik Seeley commented on SOLR-8220:
------------------------------------
bq. It sounds like you are arguing for a common way to access docvalues and
stored fields using the 'fl' parameter. I'm +1 to that.
Ah, ok... I mis-read your previous comment of "i.e. keep this issue focused on
adding syntactic sugar to read field from doc values for non-stored fields" as
advocating for new syntax for "fl" to load from non-stored docValue fields.
bq. Let's discuss this optimization in SOLR-8344 and keep the two issues
separate.
I didn't really see it as separate (it depends on how you look at it), I see
it more as, we have a new feature that treats docValues as "column-stored".
What should the default behavior be when all requested fields are both
column-stored and row-stored? I think we can make progress + commit this issue
separately, but should still come at SOLR-8344 "fresh" (i.e. not put the burden
of proof on one default more than the other).
> Read field from docValues for non stored fields
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-8220
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8220
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Keith Laban
> Attachments: SOLR-8220-ishan.patch, SOLR-8220-ishan.patch,
> SOLR-8220-ishan.patch, SOLR-8220-ishan.patch, SOLR-8220.patch,
> SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch,
> SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch
>
>
> Many times a value will be both stored="true" and docValues="true" which
> requires redundant data to be stored on disk. Since reading from docValues is
> both efficient and a common practice (facets, analytics, streaming, etc),
> reading values from docValues when a stored version of the field does not
> exist would be a valuable disk usage optimization.
> The only caveat with this that I can see would be for multiValued fields as
> they would always be returned sorted in the docValues approach. I believe
> this is a fair compromise.
> I've done a rough implementation for this as a field transform, but I think
> it should live closer to where stored fields are loaded in the
> SolrIndexSearcher.
> Two open questions/observations:
> 1) There doesn't seem to be a standard way to read values for docValues,
> facets, analytics, streaming, etc, all seem to be doing their own ways,
> perhaps some of this logic should be centralized.
> 2) What will the API behavior be? (Below is my proposed implementation)
> Parameters for fl:
> - fl="docValueField"
> -- return field from docValue if the field is not stored and in docValues,
> if the field is stored return it from stored fields
> - fl="*"
> -- return only stored fields
> - fl="+"
> -- return stored fields and docValue fields
> 2a - would be easiest implementation and might be sufficient for a first
> pass. 2b - is current behavior
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
