Sorry to poke this again but I'm not following the last comment of how I could go about extending the solr index searcher and have the extension used. Is there an example of this? Again thanks
Jamie On Aug 25, 2015 7:18 AM, "Jamie Johnson" <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > I had seen this as well, if I over wrote this by extending > SolrIndexSearcher how do I have my extension used? I didn't see a way that > could be plugged in. > On Aug 25, 2015 7:15 AM, "Mikhail Khludnev" <mkhlud...@griddynamics.com> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Thanks Mikhail. If I'm reading the SimpleFacets class correctly, out >> > delegates to DocValuesFacets when facet method is FC, what used to be >> > FieldCache I believe. DocValuesFacets either uses DocValues or builds >> then >> > using the UninvertingReader. >> > >> >> Ah.. got it. Thanks for reminding this details.It seems like even >> docValues=true doesn't help with your custom implementation. >> >> >> > >> > I am not seeing a clean extension point to add a custom >> UninvertingReader >> > to Solr, would the only way be to copy the FacetComponent and >> SimpleFacets >> > and modify as needed? >> > >> Sadly, yes. There is no proper extension point. Also, consider overriding >> SolrIndexSearcher.wrapReader(SolrCore, DirectoryReader) where the >> particular UninvertingReader is created, there you can pass the own one, >> which refers to custom FieldCache. >> >> >> > On Aug 25, 2015 12:42 AM, "Mikhail Khludnev" < >> mkhlud...@griddynamics.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hello Jamie, >> > > I don't understand how it could choose DocValuesFacets (it occurs on >> > > docValues=true) field, but then switches to >> UninvertingReader/FieldCache >> > > which means docValues=false. If you can provide more details it would >> be >> > > great. >> > > Beside of that, I suppose you can only implement and inject your own >> > > UninvertingReader, I don't think there is an extension point for this. >> > It's >> > > too specific requirement. >> > > >> > > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 3:50 AM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > as mentioned in a previous email I have a need to provide security >> > > controls >> > > > at the term level. I know that Lucene/Solr doesn't support this so >> I >> > had >> > > > baked something onto a 4.x baseline that was sufficient for my use >> > cases. >> > > > I am now looking to move that implementation to 5.x and am running >> into >> > > an >> > > > issue around faceting. Previously we were able to provide a custom >> > cache >> > > > implementation that would create separate cache entries given a >> > > particular >> > > > set of security controls, but in Solr 5 some faceting is delegated >> to >> > > > DocValuesFacets which delegates to UninvertingReader in my case (we >> are >> > > not >> > > > storing DocValues). The issue I am running into is that before 5.x >> I >> > had >> > > > the ability to influence the FieldCache that was used at the Solr >> level >> > > to >> > > > also include a security token into the key so each cache entry was >> > scoped >> > > > to a particular level. With the current implementation the >> FieldCache >> > > > seems to be an internal detail that I can't influence in anyway. Is >> > this >> > > > correct? I had noticed this Jira ticket >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5427, is there any >> > movement >> > > > on >> > > > this? Is there another way to influence the information that is put >> > into >> > > > these caches? As always thanks in advance for any suggestions. >> > > > >> > > > -Jamie >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Sincerely yours >> > > Mikhail Khludnev >> > > Principal Engineer, >> > > Grid Dynamics >> > > >> > > <http://www.griddynamics.com> >> > > <mkhlud...@griddynamics.com> >> > > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Sincerely yours >> Mikhail Khludnev >> Principal Engineer, >> Grid Dynamics >> >> <http://www.griddynamics.com> >> <mkhlud...@griddynamics.com> >> >
