Dmitri, I see this issue even when the document is an XML. I would like to note that clients send data inside CDATA ( [CDATA[my data]] ) in case any of the fields have XML strings as the value itself and want to avoid having those interpreted as XML markup.
I agree with you in that I too wish Solr would have never gotten into the "1"-"t"-"T" business and maybe enforced strict values like "true" and "false". But as of now where we stand, this is a clear breakage. I will create a JIRA soon. Happy to take this one up and submit a PR. -Rahul On Sun, Aug 28, 2022 at 8:01 PM dmitri maziuk <dmitri.maz...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2022-08-28 5:36 PM, Rahul Goswami wrote: > > Hi Dmitri, > > I am not sure if I understand your second comment. Can you please > elaborate? > > Try doing it in XML instead of JSON. JSON has data types encoded in the > syntax and if it were me, I'd take those over the 't'-'1'-'F' guesswork. > > My $.02 is Solr shouldn't have been doing what TFM says in the first > place. Among other reasons, because once you have a managed schema and > "Field value class guessing", you have a chicken-and-egg problem. > > Or at least that behaviour should be limited to XML input and clearly > documented as such, with the caveat that if the field wasn't previously > defined, your result may be anything. > > Dima > >