[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1110?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Mark Miller updated SOLR-1110:
------------------------------

    Attachment: SOLR-1110.patch

test+fix, all test pass

> Investigate Sorting on Trie field types with DistributedSearch
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-1110
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1110
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: search
>            Reporter: Shalin Shekhar Mangar
>             Fix For: 1.4
>
>         Attachments: SOLR-1110.patch
>
>
> Need to write tests to determine if Trie sorting will work correctly with 
> DistributedSearch, given the usage of Investigate Sorting on Trie field types 
> with DistributedSearch. If not, we need to figure out how to fix this.
> Refer to Uwe Schindler's comment on SOLR-940:
> {quote}
> One note to sorting:
> I am not really sure, if sorting works with Solr. The Sortfield returned by 
> TrieUtils.getSortField contains an own parser (new feature in Lucene 2.9). 
> When looking through the solr code, searching for SortField in trunk, I 
> noticed, that QueryComponent has own comparators and FieldCache code 
> (duplicating the Lucene code), and ignoring the parser given in SortField 
> (the parser is not passed to FieldCache.getInts() & Co.).
> If this is the case, it will simply not work.
> {quote}
> {quote}
> OK. If distributed search does not work, the problems are bigger: The problem 
> is not the comparator alone, the problem is the FieldCache. The distributed 
> search should fill the values into FieldCache and then let the comparator do 
> the work. Comparing lucenes code with the solr ones shows, that there are 
> some parts of LUCENE-1478 missing. The Comparators use the default parser 
> instead of the one given in SortField.getParser() to parse the values (when 
> retrieving FieldCache.getInts() & Co).
> I am not really sure, why Solr needs to duplicate the sorting code from 
> Lucene? Maybe this is no longer needed? In this case, everything would be ok 
> when removed.
> {quote}

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to