Hey I just want to verify one thing before I start doing this: function queries only require fields to be indexed but don't require them to be stored right?
-----Original Message----- From: Petersen, Robert [mailto:robert.peter...@mail.rakuten.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:39 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: Solr 3.6.1: changing a field from stored to not stored Good info, Thanks Hoss! I was going to add a more specific fl= parameter to my queries at the same time. Currently I am doing fl=*,score so that will have to be changed. -----Original Message----- From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:18 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Solr 3.6.1: changing a field from stored to not stored : index? I noticed I am unnecessarily storing some fields in my index and : I'd like to stop storing them without having to 'reindex the world' and : let the changes just naturally percolate into my index as updates come : in the normal course of things. Do you guys think I could get away with : this? Yes, you can easily get away with this type of change w/o re-indexing, however you won't gain any immediate index size savings until each and every existing doc has been reindexed and the old copies expunged from the index via segment merges. the one hicup thta can affect people when doing this is what happens if you use something like "fl=*" (and likely "hl=*" as well) ... many places in Solr will try to "avoid failure" if a stored field is found in the index which isn't defined in the schema, and treat that stored value as a string (legacy behavior designed to make it easier for people to point Solr at old lucene indexes built w/o using Solr) ... so if these stored values are not strings, you might get some weird data in your response for these documents. -Hoss
