Curiosity is good <G>. Do be aware, though, that the behavior is not guaranteed, it's just "how things happen to work" and may change without warning....
Erick On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Marc Sturlese <marc.sturl...@gmail.com>wrote: > > >>Well, sorting requires that all the unique values in the target field > >>get loaded into memory > That's what I tought, thanks. > > >>But a larger question is whether what your doing is worthwhile > >>even as just a measurement. You say > >>"This is good for me, I don't care for my tests". I claim that > >>you do care > I just like play with things. First checked the behavior of sorting on > multiValued field and what I noticed was, let's say you have docs with > field > called 'num': > doc1->num:2;doc2->num:1,num:4;doc3->num:5 > Sorting by the field num what you get is: > After sorting asc I get: doc2,doc1,doc3. > The behavior seems to be always the same (I am not saying it works like > that > but it's what I've seen in my examples) > After seeing that I just decided to check the performance. The point is > simply curiosity. > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/performance-sorting-multivalued-field-tp905943p913626.html > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
