Hi Tom, I am pretty sure that comment is outdated and none of those constraints are valid anymore. It's there in the default config in 7.x as well.
Can you please create a Jira so that we can fix this. On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 12:15 AM, Tom Burton-West <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > There appears to be an error in the comments in the Solr 6.6 example > schemas. No responses except for one offline to this issue in the Solr > users list so I am posting to the dev list with the hope to fix the > comments if they are indeed in error. See below. Should I open a JIRA issue? > > The comments in the example schema's for Solr 6.6, state that the > StrField type must be single-valued to support doc values > > For example Solr-6.6.0/server/solr/configsets/basic_configs/ > conf/managed-schema: > > 216 <!-- The StrField type is not analyzed, but indexed/stored > verbatim. > 217 It supports doc values but in that case the field needs to > be > 218 single-valued and either required or have a default value. > 219 --> > > However, on line 221 a StrField is declared with docValues that is > multiValued: > 221 <fieldType name="strings" class="solr.StrField" > sortMissingLast="true" multiValued="true" docValues="true" /> > > Also note that the comments above say that the field must either be > required or have a default value, but line 221 appears to satisfy neither > condition. > > The JavaDocs indicate that StrField can be multi-valued https://lucene.ap > ache.org/core/6_6_0//core/org/apache/lucene/index/DocValuesType.html > > Is the comment in the example schema file completely wrong, or is there > some issue with using a docValues with a multivalued StrField? > > Tom Burton-West > > https://www.hathitrust.org/blogslarge-scale-search >
