Not sure why you cross-posted this, my answer stands the same: "As an integer 0045 or 000000000000045 or 45 is exactly the same value in the decimal positional format.
I agree with Charlie, if you need it to be a string, then use a string. You can potentially just use the string as a stored value, a copy field if you like, and keep the original indexed as an integer to do math search operations on. " -------------------------- *Alessandro Benedetti* Director @ Sease Ltd. *Apache Lucene/Solr Committer* *Apache Solr PMC Member* e-mail: a.benede...@sease.io *Sease* - Information Retrieval Applied Consulting | Training | Open Source Website: Sease.io <http://sease.io/> LinkedIn <https://linkedin.com/company/sease-ltd> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/seaseltd> | Youtube <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDx86ZKLYNpI3gzMercM7BQ> | Github <https://github.com/seaseltd> On Tue, 4 Jul 2023 at 08:42, Mikhail Khludnev <m...@apache.org> wrote: > Hello Shubham. > Storing 45 takes _less than_ one byte, Storing "0045" about four. I think > Solr just made a reasonable choice. > > > On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 9:47 AM John Jackson <john382...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > > > Recently I got a response but Whenever we are inserting this value in the > > Database value is *0045*. the value showing in the listing is also > *0045*. > > but whenever we try to insert the value in *0045* it saves *45* in Solr. > So > > how can we achieve *0045* in solr for same? > > > > But if we are using copyField it leads to a large indexing space issue. > So > > is there any other way to achieve the goal to save *0045* in Solr? > > > > > > > > Any solution to achieve this goal. > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > > Shubham Panchal > > > > > -- > Sincerely yours > Mikhail Khludnev >