My understanding of Lucene Sorting is that it will sort by 'tokens'
and not by 'full fields'... so that for sorting you need 'full-string'
(non-tokenized) field, and to search you need another one tokenized.
For instance, use 'string' for sorting, and 'text_ws' for search; and
use 'copyField'... (some memory for copyField)
Sorting using tokenized field: 100,000 documents, each 'Book Title'
consists of 10 tokens in average, ... - total 1,000,000 (probably
unique) tokens in a hashtable; with nontokenized field - 100,000
entries, and Lucene internal FieldCache is used instead of SOLR LRU.
Also, with tokenized fields 'sorting' is not natural (alphabetical order)...
Fuad Efendi
==============
http://www.linkedin.com/in/liferay
Quoting sundar shankar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
The field is of type "text_ws". Is this not recomended. Should I use
text instead?
If increasing LRU cache helps you: - you are probably using
'tokenized' field for sorting (could you confirm please?)...
...you should use 'non-tokenized single-valued non-boolean' for
better performance of sorting...
