[GitHub] metron issue #945: METRON-1464: Convert schemas to be compatible with Solr 5...
Github user cestella commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/945 Ok, I'm cool with it. +1 by inspection; great work. ---
[GitHub] metron issue #945: METRON-1464: Convert schemas to be compatible with Solr 5...
Github user merrimanr commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/945 When looking at the reference guide, it's not obvious to me what the differences are between Point and Trie fields as it relates to our use case. Point field types for the corresponding Trie field types don't exist in 5.5 anyways so I suspect it's a moot point if supporting 5.5 is desirable. Yes this has been tested with the HDP Search MPack (Solr 5.5.2) and the manually installed Solr 6.6.2. ---
[GitHub] metron issue #945: METRON-1464: Convert schemas to be compatible with Solr 5...
Github user simonellistonball commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/945 To be fair, my question is probably just as appropriate on a discuss thread and a separate ticket out of said thread if it comes to it. ---
[GitHub] metron issue #945: METRON-1464: Convert schemas to be compatible with Solr 5...
Github user cestella commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/945 @merrimanr you ran this up in Solr 5.5 as well as 6.6, right? If so, then I'm content with the change and give a +1 pending (other than holding for an answer to Simon's question, which I was wondering as well). ---
[GitHub] metron issue #945: METRON-1464: Convert schemas to be compatible with Solr 5...
Github user simonellistonball commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/945 Are we losing anything by moving the scheme from Range to Trie types?, repeating my comment on https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/922: Given that our use case is heavily dependant on sorting, I wonder why not the Trie based indices for numeric fields. I may be completely wrong on their advantages but would love to hear the logic behind the choice of Point indices. If there is a good reason, maybe we should consider retaining those for 6.6 in addition to the 5.5 clusters. Either way it would be be good to understand the basis for the type decision. ---
