[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6741?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14955952#comment-14955952
]
Erick Erickson commented on SOLR-6741:
--------------------------------------
I'm want to float the notion that we'll need to specialized IPv4 support until
there are _no_ IPv4-only IP addresses people want to index. In very large
volume situations (think log files), requiring that a field support IPv6 when
you _know_ that IPv4 is all you're interested in seems wasteful to require IPv6
capabilities space-wise as well as making queries more complex and consuming
unnecessary memory. Even if there's a 128 bit native type.
We could, in future if/when IPv6 support is added allow a hint in the schema
file to use this code in future, something like:
<field name="ip" type="ipAddress" indexed="true" stored="true"
multiValued="false" ipv4only="true" />
where ipv4only defaults to "false". If that is desirable, I'd argue that this
patch is not wasted effort and is in fact a building block for IPv6 support.
Straw-man proposal:
1> break this out into a separate JIRA, having an IPv4 patch under an IPv6
header is...odd
2> Change the class names and field type to reference IPv4
3> Fix it up for trunk and commit.
What do people think?
> IPv6 Field Type
> ---------------
>
> Key: SOLR-6741
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6741
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Lloyd Ramey
> Attachments: SOLR-6741.patch
>
>
> It would be nice if Solr had a field type which could be used to index IPv6
> data and supported efficient range queries.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
