Should SubQuery be faster than FunctionQuery? On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 10:24 AM Vincenzo D'Amore <v.dam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, looking at this sample it seems you have just one document for '12345', > one for '23456' and so on so forth. If this is true, why don't just try > with a subquery > > https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/6_6/transforming-result-documents.html#TransformingResultDocuments-_subquery_ > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 3:31 PM Jae Joo <jaejo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I have the requirement to create field - xyz to be returned based on the > > matched result. > > Here Is the code . > > > > XYZ:concat( > > > > if(exists(query({!v='field1:12345'})), '<G>12345</G>', ''), > > > > if(exists(query({!v='field1:23456'})), '<G>23456</G>', ''), > > > > if(exists(query({!v='field1:34567'})), '<G>34567</G>', ''), > > > > if(exists(query({!v='field:45678'})), '<G>45678</G>','') > > ), > > > > I am feeling this is very complex, so I am looking for some smart and > > faster ideas. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jae > > > > > -- > Vincenzo D'Amore >
