information have a look at their web site or contact them.
Regards,
Daniel
-Original Message-
From: Jibo John [mailto:jiboj...@mac.com]
Sent: 23 July 2009 18:44
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Storing string field in solr.ExternalFieldFile type
Thanks for the quick response
First off: it seems like you are massively missunderstanding the point of
ExternalFileField ... the reason it only supports float as a base type
is because it's purpose is to allow people to have an external file
provide float values in ValueSource calculations (ie: you can have a
Thanks for the response, Eric.
We have seen that size of the index has a direct impact on the search
speed, especially when the index size is in GBs, so trying all
possible ways to keep the index size as low as we can.
We thought solr.ExternalFileField type would help to keep the index
Subject: Re: Storing string field in solr.ExternalFieldFile type
Thanks for the response, Eric.
We have seen that size of the index has a direct impact on the search speed,
especially when the index size is in GBs, so trying all possible ways to keep
the index size as low as we can.
We
/jobs.html?mls
Lucene, Solr, Nutch, Katta, Hadoop, HBase, UIMA, NLP, NER, IR
- Original Message
From: Jibo John jiboj...@mac.com
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 12:08:26 PM
Subject: Re: Storing string field in solr.ExternalFieldFile type
Thanks
, NER, IR
- Original Message
From: Jibo John jiboj...@mac.com
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 1:43:45 PM
Subject: Re: Storing string field in solr.ExternalFieldFile type
Thanks for the quick response, Otis.
We have been able to achieve the ratio of 2
Hoping the experts chime in if I'm wrong, but
As far as I know, while storing a field increases the size of an index,
it doesn't have much impact on the search speed. Which you could
pretty easily test by creating the index both ways and firing off some
timing queries and comparing.
