lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Hatcher <erik.hatc...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: SOLR-1131: disconnect between fields created by poly fields
Date Sat, 12 Dec 2009 05:22:08 GMT
They don't violate the schema, do they?   The fields added from both  
of those (and DIH too) all must be either fields or match dynamic  
field patterns.  Right?

	Erik


On Dec 12, 2009, at 6:08 AM, Lance Norskog wrote:

> There are already components (ExtractingRequestHandler, Deduplication)
> that secretly add fields which violate the schema. Personally I would
> nuke this ability; I've had major problems with junk in the indexed
> data and discovering secret fields would have made my head explode
> that much louder.
>
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Yonik Seeley
> <yonik@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>> <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>>> Actually if it was the case that poly field mapped to a single  
>>> dynamic
>>> field, then I would agree with you, but as is the discussion, poly  
>>> field can
>>> map to _many_ dynamic fields, which is where the drift occurs.
>>
>> I'm not sure if we're using the exact same terminology, but it's well
>> defined how many dynamic fields would be created by the basic point
>> class (exactly one) *if* we decide to go that route and use that
>> option.  Can you give an examples of what you mean?  Is your  
>> objection
>> to this point class registering a single dynamic field, or are you
>> talking about a hypothetical case?
>>
>> -Yonik
>> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Lance Norskog
> goksron@gmail.com


Mime
View raw message