[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4676?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13623664#comment-13623664
]
David Smiley commented on SOLR-4676:
------------------------------------
bq. Why? this is a valid configuration. You might think its odd, but -1 to
removing this.
That aspect of my patch was incidental to my objective (share Lucene FieldType)
and it doesn't matter that much to me even though I think it's kinda lame; so
I'll put that back in my subsequent patch to satisfy your concern.
Do you have any other feedback?
bq. For reference, returning null in createField for docvalues-only fields
caused SOLR-4647.
Thanks for that reference, Adrien. The way you worded this suggests it's a
problem for createField to return null. But that has been a normal accepted
behavior of createField that may as well be set in stone now for Solr. If I
had to start the API from scratch, createField() would not even exist because
the notion that there is exactly one Lucene field per Solr field is patently
false. I'll add my suggested solution to SOLR-4647 to that issue.
> Share a Lucene FieldType instance instead of creating on each call to
> createField()
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-4676
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4676
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Schema and Analysis
> Reporter: David Smiley
> Assignee: David Smiley
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: SOLR-4676_Share_Lucene_FieldType_in_SchemaField.patch
>
>
> I think the Lucene FieldType instances should be cached on Solr's SchemaField
> so that they don't have to be needlessly re-created for each indexed value
> that runs through Solr in SchemaField.createField(). The only obstacle I see
> to this is that getIndexOptions(field,val) takes the value, and if that value
> were to alter the logic then the FieldType can't be shared. This is a
> protected method and I don't see anything that overrides it, and the default
> implementation doesn't use the value. So I think it can be removed. Patch in
> progress...
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
