[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3442?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13269684#comment-13269684
]
Jack Krupansky commented on SOLR-3442:
--------------------------------------
I don't disagree with the gist of your argument, but I would cringe a little if
we change the schema so that it doesn't work very well if the user does drop
back to the lucene query parser with &defType=lucene which has only a single
default field.
OTOH, maybe that is simply the cost of making the example schema (and config)
be more representative of "best practices". But, that sort of implies that the
Lucene query parser is not a "best practice", at least when searchable text
content is spread over multiple fields.
> Example schema switch to DisMax instead of CopyField
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-3442
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3442
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Schema and Analysis
> Reporter: Jan Høydahl
> Labels: dismax
>
> Spinoff from SOLR-3439:
> The use of copyField in todays example schema is an anti pattern since we
> indirectly teach people to duplicate most of their content, while most would
> be better off using DisMax, or at least a combination.
--
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: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
