in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/numberic-or-string-type-for-non-sortable-field-tp2606353p2606353.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I wonder if i shall use solr int or
string for such field with following
requirement
multi-value
facet needed
sort not needed
The field value is a an id. Therefore, i can store as
either numeric field
or just a string. Shall i choose string
for efficiency?
Trie based integer
: The field value is a an id. Therefore, i can store as
: either numeric field
: or just a string. Shall i choose string
: for efficiency?
:
: Trie based integer (tint) is preferred for faster faceting.
range faceting/filtering yes -- not for field faceting which is what i
think he's
://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/numberic-or-string-type-for-non-sortable-field-tp2606353p2606762.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I will only facet based on field value, not ranged
query (it is just some
ids for a multi-value field). And i
won't do sort on the field either.
In that case, is string more efficient for the
requirement?
Hoss was saying to use, fieldType name=int class=solr.TrieIntField
Can I know why? I thought solr is tuned for string if no sorting of facet by
range query is needed.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/numberic-or-string-type-for-non-sortable-field-tp2606353p2607932.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive
: Can I know why? I thought solr is tuned for string if no sorting of facet by
: range query is needed.
tuned for string doesn't really mean anything to me, i'm not sure what
that's in refrence to. nothing thta i know of is particularly optimized
for strings. Almost anything can be
