> ??? maxFieldLength only applies to the number of tokens indexed. You > will always get the complete field back if it's stored, regardless of > what maxFieldLength is.
What I meant was, that it is different from just having a field with all the tokens compared to using copyField to copy all the content to a field. CopyField doesn't just copy the contents to the field but seems to somehow link them there. So if my maxFieldLength is for example set to 100 and I use copyField for 101 other fields, will the 101th get truncated? >> Is there a performance penalty for using copyFields when indexing? > > copyFields are done as a discrete step before indexing... almost no > cost to do that. > Indexing itself will have a performance impact if there are more > fields to index + store as a result of the copyField commands. The documents in my application have something like 400+ fields (many multivalued). For easy searching the application copies all the contents of the 400+ fields to one field (fulltext field) which is used as defaultfield. This field is quite large for many documents (it gets as long as 550000 tokens). I was thinking about using copyField for copying the fields onto that field instead of having the application do it before sending it to Solr. The the solution I tried before was using DisMaxRequestHandler, but as it doesn't suppport wildcards that is not usable for my application. -- Maximilian Hütter blue elephant systems GmbH Wollgrasweg 49 D-70599 Stuttgart Tel : (+49) 0711 - 45 10 17 578 Fax : (+49) 0711 - 45 10 17 573 e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sitz : Stuttgart, Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 24106 Geschäftsführer: Joachim Hörnle, Thomas Gentsch, Holger Dietrich
