lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org>
Subject Re: SOLR-1131 - Multiple Fields per Field Type
Date Wed, 09 Dec 2009 20:21:00 GMT

On Dec 9, 2009, at 2:46 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Yonik Seeley <yonik@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> So... the question is, do we have a concrete alternative to this that
>> is well fleshed out?
> 
> I do, I do... just a little variant that is geo specific and hence
> results in nicer names :-)
> 
> <fieldType name="point" latSuffix="_lat" lonSuffix="_lon/>
> <field name="home" type="point"/>
> <dynamicField name="*_lat" type="tdouble" indexed="true" stored="false"/>
> <dynamicField name="*_lon" type="tdouble" indexed="true" stored="false"/>
> 
> <dynamicField name="*_point" type="point"/>
> 
> home_lat
> home_lon
> 
> work_point_lat
> work_point_lon
> 
> Note: if you want the double or tripple underscore to help prevent
> collisions... then you could use latSuffix="___lat" and define the
> dynamic fields that way.



Additionally, how do you deal w/ a point in a 3D (or n-D) space?

I just don't see why a user shouldn't be able to use the FieldType just like any other FieldType,
dynamic or not.  I think it is easy enough to detect name collisions and you still get all
the flexibility of dynamic fields.

So, for example, say I was modeling a user and their employment history.  Thus, I have a single
home address plus multiple work addresses.  One way of doing this would be:

<field name="home" type="point"/>
<dynamicField name="work_*" type="point"/>

And that should all just work.  The user would just ever deal w/ "home" or "work_*", but not
have to deal w/ home___0 or whatever unless they really truly wanted to and even then I am
not sure it is needed.

How would you do this with what is proposed above?  Seems like you'd have a whole proliferation
of fields.

Also, I don't see why a FieldType should have a dep. on a Field.  Having a dependency on another
FieldType seems reasonable, but I'm not sure about on a Field.
Mime
View raw message