[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12768?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16724260#comment-16724260
]
David Smiley commented on SOLR-12768:
-------------------------------------
Simple proposal:
* Use a new FieldType subclass to a simplify upgrades and enable ease of use
* Use one index token instead of path tokenizing at this stage. This is
lighter-weight when a user might not even need/want to query on it. Instead,
queries would use wildcards on it to express relationships. Some day in the
future, someone could make an easy to use query parser and/or query language
that would build the appropriate wildcard patterns.
The index analyzer would simply be the indexed equivalent of:
{code:xml}
<tokenizer class="solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory"/>
<!--remove the # and digit index of array from path
toppings#1/ingredients#/ turns to toppings/ingredients/ -->
<filter class="solr.PatternReplaceFilterFactory" pattern="#\d*"
replace="all"/>
{code}
Notice the last pattern is simplified and fixes a bug in the current test that
will match all digits instead of only those after a pound. I wrote a unit test
for that fix.
CC [~moshebla]
> Determine how _nest_path_ should be analyzed to support various use-cases
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-12768
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12768
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Reporter: David Smiley
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: master (8.0)
>
>
> We know we need {{\_nest\_path\_}} in the schema for the new nested documents
> support, and we loosely know what goes in it. From a DocValues perspective,
> we've got it down; though we might tweak it. From an indexing (text
> analysis) perspective, we're not quite sure yet, though we've got a test
> schema, {{schema-nest.xml}} with a decent shot at it. Ultimately, how we
> index it will depend on the query/filter use-cases we need to support. So
> we'll review some of them here.
> TBD: Not sure if the outcome of this task is just a "decide" or wether we
> also potentially add a few tests for some of these cases, and/or if we also
> add a FieldType to make declaring it as easy as a one-liner. A FieldType
> would have other benefits too once we're ready to make querying on the path
> easier.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
