Got that. Since I am still using Solr 1.3, the defaults should work fine, field 
cache for single value and enum for multi-valued fields.

Thanks,
Kalyan Manepalli

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Miller [mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 3:01 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: FilterCache issue

Its the facet.method param:

http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SimpleFacetParameters#head-7574cb658563f6de3ad54cd99a793cd73d593caa

--
- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com



Manepalli, Kalyan wrote:
> Mark,
>         Where do we specify the method? fieldCache or otherwise
>
> Thanks,
> Kalyan Manepalli
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Miller [mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 12:22 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: FilterCache issue
>
> Maybe he is not using the FieldCache method?
>
> Yonik Seeley wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Manepalli,
>> Kalyan<kalyan.manepa...@orbitz.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The fields are defined as single valued and they are non tokenized for.
>>> I am using solr 1.3 waiting for release of solr 1.4.
>>>
>>>
>> Then the filterCache won't be used for faceting, just for filters.
>> You should be able to verify this by looking at how the cache stats
>> change for a single faceting request.
>>
>> -Yonik
>> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Kalyan Manepalli
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ysee...@gmail.com [mailto:ysee...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Yonik Seeley
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 10:15 AM
>>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: FilterCache issue
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Manepalli,
>>> Kalyan<kalyan.manepa...@orbitz.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I am faceting on the single values only.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> You may have only added a single value to each field, but is the field
>>> defined to be single valued or multi valued?
>>>
>>> Also, what version of Solr are you using?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> - Mark
>
> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>
>
>
>




Reply via email to