Re: stored and indexed in schema
On Apr 1, 2008, at 1:35 PM, Vinci wrote: Thank you for your reply, It look like I will have some benefit but I will also lose the highlighter/summary functionary, it that right? Ya can't highlight what you don't have. So that's true. I think eventually it would be handy for Solr to allow the client to post in some text to be highlighted, but it does not currently support that. Erik Thank you, Vinci Erik Hatcher wrote: On Mar 31, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Vinci wrote: I would like to ask, if I set a field to be indexed but not stored, I can retrieved the document but cannot retrieve this field? That's correct. By definition :) If I have large field that I want to index but I am not suppose to show them to user (The origin content stored in another processed document where I am using another field in Solr to point to their location...I throw the retrieval job to the server :P), will I get faster respond even the query doesn't ask solr to return this large field? You'll get better response in that Solr won't be taking the time to retrieve the large stored field, writing it to the response, and the client-side parsing that data, sure. Erik -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/stored-and- indexed-in-schema-tp16411090p16419438.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: stored and indexed in schema
Hi, Thank you for your reply, It look like I will have some benefit but I will also lose the highlighter/summary functionary, it that right? Thank you, Vinci Erik Hatcher wrote: > > > On Mar 31, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Vinci wrote: >> I would like to ask, if I set a field to be indexed but not stored, >> I can >> retrieved the document but cannot retrieve this field? > > That's correct. By definition :) > >> If I have large field that I want to index but I am not suppose to >> show them >> to user (The origin content stored in another processed document >> where I am >> using another field in Solr to point to their location...I throw the >> retrieval job to the server :P), will I get faster respond even the >> query >> doesn't ask solr to return this large field? > > You'll get better response in that Solr won't be taking the time to > retrieve the large stored field, writing it to the response, and the > client-side parsing that data, sure. > > Erik > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/stored-and-indexed-in-schema-tp16411090p16419438.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: stored and indexed in schema
On Mar 31, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Vinci wrote: I would like to ask, if I set a field to be indexed but not stored, I can retrieved the document but cannot retrieve this field? That's correct. By definition :) If I have large field that I want to index but I am not suppose to show them to user (The origin content stored in another processed document where I am using another field in Solr to point to their location...I throw the retrieval job to the server :P), will I get faster respond even the query doesn't ask solr to return this large field? You'll get better response in that Solr won't be taking the time to retrieve the large stored field, writing it to the response, and the client-side parsing that data, sure. Erik
stored and indexed in schema
Hi, I would like to ask, if I set a field to be indexed but not stored, I can retrieved the document but cannot retrieve this field? If I have large field that I want to index but I am not suppose to show them to user (The origin content stored in another processed document where I am using another field in Solr to point to their location...I throw the retrieval job to the server :P), will I get faster respond even the query doesn't ask solr to return this large field? Thank you, Vinci -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/stored-and-indexed-in-schema-tp16411090p16411090.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
