Thanks Pat, been a bit, because I thought I had a solution.  I was
going to put the index on a related model, but that create's a whole
lot of essentially duplicate entries in the index.

So the first question is kind of a general performance question, just
talking out loud, hopefully you have some thoughts on.  Since a bunch
of the records would be indexing the same set of words, and we are
talking about less than a million records, how bad would it really be?

Secondly can you further describe the issues with using STI here?

Much appreciated.
Steve

On Jun 12, 11:54 am, Pat Allan <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yeah, TS isn't built to handle that neatly either.
>
> You're not the first to request it, it's just a matter of me finding  
> time to make it all play nicely with Sphinx.
>
> Sphinx itself has certain expectations around fields that refer to the  
> same documents to exist in all relevant indexes, so it makes things a  
> little tricky.
>
> --
> Pat
>
> On 12/06/2009, at 2:51 PM, Greg Weber wrote:
>
>
>
> > That should work unless thinking sphinx has a problem with subclasses
> > (You will be able to tell by looking at the sphinx config). A
> > different class will be a different index, and they will be searched
> > independently.
>
> > On Jun 12, 10:56 am, steve <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Despite being a bit ugly, if I created a new model that inherited  
> >> from
> >> that model, would I run into any issues that you foresee?
>
> >> On Jun 11, 8:55 pm, Greg Weber <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>> I don't think there is a way with sphinx (not just thinking  
> >>> sphinx) to
> >>> specify an index source in a search. One thing to keep in mind is  
> >>> that
> >>> every document must have a unique id. So if you have multiple  
> >>> sources
> >>> on the same model, you have to make sure that the same row does not
> >>> occur in both indexes, or you must merge the sources together (not
> >>> supported by thinking sphinx).
>
> >>> You may be best of creating an attribute that is a custom SQL IF
> >>> statement. Other options not supported by thinking sphinx are  
> >>> multiple
> >>> indexes or id mangling (add 1 billion to the id of every row in the
> >>> second index).
>
> >>> On Jun 11, 3:59 pm, steve <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>> So I successfully created a second index on the same model by using
> >>>> another define_index block.  However I would like to invoke those
> >>>> searches separately as I need to do different filtering on the
> >>>> results.  Is there some way to pass the intended source (i.e
> >>>> user_core_0 or user_core_1) into the search call?
>
> >>>> Thanks for your help.
>
> >>>> Steve
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thinking Sphinx" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/thinking-sphinx?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to