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
>
>

Reply via email to