[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8220?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15072116#comment-15072116
]
Ishan Chattopadhyaya edited comment on SOLR-8220 at 12/27/15 10:51 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks [~shalinmangar] for your commit, and Keith, Yonik and Erick for your
inputs.
I suggest we change:
{code}
+ Also note that returning stored fields from docValues (default in schema
versions 1.6+) returns multiValued
+ fields in sorted order. If you require the older behavior of multiValued
fields being returned in the
+ original insertion order, set useDocValuesAsStored="false" for the
individual fields or make
+ sure your schema version is < 1.6. This does not require re-indexing.
+ See SOLR-8220 for more details.
{code}
to
{code}
+ Also note that while returning non-stored fields from docValues (default in
schema versions 1.6+, unless useDocValuesAsStored is false) returns multiValued
+ fields in sorted order. If you require the multiValued fields being returned
in the
+ original insertion order, then make your multiValued field as stored. This
requires re-indexing.
+ See SOLR-8220 for more details.
{code}
I think the first text block is relevant once SOLR-8344 goes in. In this issue,
we're just introducing new behaviour of returning non-stored values from DVs.
was (Author: ichattopadhyaya):
I suggest we change:
{code}
+ Also note that returning stored fields from docValues (default in schema
versions 1.6+) returns multiValued
+ fields in sorted order. If you require the older behavior of multiValued
fields being returned in the
+ original insertion order, set useDocValuesAsStored="false" for the
individual fields or make
+ sure your schema version is < 1.6. This does not require re-indexing.
+ See SOLR-8220 for more details.
{code}
to
{code}
+ Also note that while returning non-stored fields from docValues (default in
schema versions 1.6+, unless useDocValuesAsStored is false) returns multiValued
+ fields in sorted order. If you require the multiValued fields being returned
in the
+ original insertion order, then make your multiValued field as stored. This
requires re-indexing.
+ See SOLR-8220 for more details.
{code}
> 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
> Assignee: Shalin Shekhar Mangar
> Attachments: SOLR-8220-5x.patch, 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, SOLR-8220.patch,
> SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch,
> SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch,
> SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch, SOLR-8220.patch,
> SOLR-8220.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: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
