> So what will be added is just another set of pointers to each relevant > term. That's not going to be very large. Probably
Hi Shawn. This explains much ! Thanks. In case of text fields, the highlight is done on the source fields and the _text_ field is only used for lookup. This behavior is perfect for my needs. On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 05:28:25PM -0700, Shawn Heisey wrote: > On 12/26/2019 1:21 PM, Nicolas Paris wrote: > > Below a part of the managed-schema. There is 1k section* fields. The > > second experience, I removed the copyField, droped the collection and > > re-indexed the whole. To mesure the index size, I went to solr-cloud and > > looked in the cloud part: 40GO per shard. I also look at the folder > > size. I made some tests and the _text_ field is indexed. > > Your schema says that the destination field is not stored and doesn't have > docValues. So the only thing it has is indexed. > > All of the terms generated by index analysis will already be in the index > from the source fields. So what will be added is just another set of > pointers to each relevant term. That's not going to be very large. Probably > only a few bytes for each term. > > So with this copyField, the index will get larger, but probably not > significantly. > > Thanks, > Shawn > -- nicolas
