[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3076?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13239202#comment-13239202
]
Mikhail Khludnev commented on SOLR-3076:
----------------------------------------
Michael,
It's a great point about a contrast between QPs for query time and index time
joins. I haven't realized it before. Completely agree.
bq. So perhaps it's fine to add crazy-expert syntax that end users would rarely
use but search app developers might...?
That's actually what I'm talking about - start from it.
Also, I don't assume that this "crazy expert syntax" is a termination stage for
the this issue. We can have a kind of modular approach here: ER-schema module
will translate plain set of filter queries into the BJQ tree expressed in
"crazy expert syntax".
> Solr should support block joins
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-3076
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3076
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Grant Ingersoll
> Attachments: SOLR-3076.patch, SOLR-3076.patch, SOLR-3076.patch,
> SOLR-3076.patch, SOLR-3076.patch, bjq-vs-filters-backward-disi.patch,
> bjq-vs-filters-illegal-state.patch, child-bjqparser.patch,
> parent-bjq-qparser.patch, parent-bjq-qparser.patch,
> solrconf-bjq-erschema-snippet.xml, tochild-bjq-filtered-search-fix.patch
>
>
> Lucene has the ability to do block joins, we should add it to Solr.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
