[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1298?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12794111#action_12794111
]
Grant Ingersoll commented on SOLR-1298:
---------------------------------------
bq. I'm not sure if SolrIndexSearcher is the right place for this or not though
- perhaps its document() method should stick to just the stored fields?
Both Chris' patch here and Noble's on SOLR-1566 take the approach of modifying
SolrIndexSearcher.doc() for part of the solution. Not saying this is right or
wrong, but I think it would be useful to document here the rationale about why
not to do it. Is it just b/c that method is expected to do, more or less, what
the Lucene IndexSearcher does?
> FunctionQuery results as pseudo-fields
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-1298
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1298
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Grant Ingersoll
> Assignee: Grant Ingersoll
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.5
>
> Attachments: SOLR-1298-FieldValues.patch, SOLR-1298.patch
>
>
> It would be helpful if the results of FunctionQueries could be added as
> fields to a document.
> Couple of options here:
> 1. Run FunctionQuery as part of relevance score and add that piece to the
> document
> 2. Run the function (not really a query) during Document/Field retrieval
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
