Mailing-List: contact solr-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of noble.paul@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.182.191 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition
         :references;
        b=NB4L1uXlodzWBwa+zaacHikLbi1XMsZcNJMOzxRSUHY8/2AhsI5bFhZxHV4s2UaIKY
         juq2wZoOoIuihCj2kezNLfHcqD9VcKpHSDc4z6AbuMOwYWR9rzKIlaboj7L2WJ/GM2/p
         +oEWREI8VCPv3gBdOvtV35Ck7BB3gRm+Z5/5c=
Message-ID: <5e76b0ad0811050236r32e6bf7fw5660cd4d29e831e0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:06:00 +0530
From: "=?UTF-8?B?Tm9ibGUgUGF1bCDgtKg=?=
 =?UTF-8?B?4LWL4LSs4LS/4LSz4LWN4oCNIOCkqOCli+CkrOCljeCks+CljQ==?="
 <noble.paul@gmail.com>
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: How to handle large field values.
In-Reply-To: <dac6c7450811050152y253b5a57w6a89412076197805@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <dac6c7450811050152y253b5a57w6a89412076197805@mail.gmail.com>

the 'fl' parameter can be added to the defaults for your search
handler in solrconfig.xml

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Luca Molteni <volothamp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> dealing with very large fields, let's say text documents, I found that there
> is a global slowness (on my computer)  in returning those field. Since most
> of the time what we want is an "highlight" value of the field and not the
> entire field, I thought that we can omit these field from the query. I've
> tried two methods:
>
> - Stored = false works very well, the query is faster, but the highlightning
> doesn't work anymore (sigh, I know it's by design).
> - Stored = true and filtering with the "fl" parameters requires me to enter
> all the fields by hand, since the fl query doesn't support a minus operator
> (let's say, all the field withouth my
> veryLargeFieldIDontWantToRetrieveButIWantToSeeAVerySmallPortion).
>
> Strangely, using the "fl" parameter in federeated search with "shards" and
> two different server with different schemas, gave me strange results (no
> results, actually). It all works well using only one shard, but it was very
> difficult to benchmark it.
>
> Any advice? I hope I'm missing something.
>
> Thanks,
>
> L.M.
>


-- 
--Noble Paul