copyField for big indexes
Is it a good rule of thumb, that when dealing with large indexes copyField should not be used. It seems to duplicate the indexing of data. You don't need copyField to be able to search on multiple fields. Example, if I have two fields: title and post and I want to search on both, I could just query title:word OR post:word So it seems to me if you have lot's of data and a large indexes, copyField should be avoided. Any thoughts? -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/copyField-for-big-indexes-tp3275712p3275712.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: copyField for big indexes
copyField should only be used if there's a good reason, that is you need to tokenize/analyze stuff differently, for instance faceting. It's not so much a matter of the index size, as whether the copyFields are necessary to get your needed functionality. You're right that you can construct queries across several fields as your example. Another strategy would be to just use (e)dismax. Best Erick On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Tom springmeth...@gmail.com wrote: Is it a good rule of thumb, that when dealing with large indexes copyField should not be used. It seems to duplicate the indexing of data. You don't need copyField to be able to search on multiple fields. Example, if I have two fields: title and post and I want to search on both, I could just query title:word OR post:word So it seems to me if you have lot's of data and a large indexes, copyField should be avoided. Any thoughts? -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/copyField-for-big-indexes-tp3275712p3275712.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: copyField for big indexes
Thanks Erick -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/copyField-for-big-indexes-tp3275712p3275816.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: copyField for big indexes
It depends. copyField may be good if you want to copy into a Soundex field, and then boost the sounded field lower than the tokenized field. What are you trying to do ? On 8/22/11 11:14 AM, Tom springmeth...@gmail.com wrote: Is it a good rule of thumb, that when dealing with large indexes copyField should not be used. It seems to duplicate the indexing of data. You don't need copyField to be able to search on multiple fields. Example, if I have two fields: title and post and I want to search on both, I could just query title:word OR post:word So it seems to me if you have lot's of data and a large indexes, copyField should be avoided. Any thoughts? -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/copyField-for-big-indexes-tp3275712p327 5712.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: copyField for big indexes
Bill, I was using it as a simple default search field. I realise now that's not a good reason to use copyField. As I see it now, it should be used if you want to search in a way that is different: use different analyzers, etc; not for just searching on multiple fields in a single query. Thanks -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/copyField-for-big-indexes-tp3275712p3276994.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
