Thank you very much for your very fast answer and all the pointers. That's what I thought, but then I got confused by the last note http://wiki.apache.org/solr/StatsComponent
"TrieFields <http://wiki.apache.org/solr/TrieFields> has to use a precisionStep of -1 to avoid using UnInvertedField<http://wiki.apache.org/solr/UnInvertedField>.java. Consider using one field for doing stats, and one for doing range facetting on. " I assume it referred to former version of Solr. On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Chris Hostetter <hossman_luc...@fucit.org>wrote: > > : Can I expect the FieldCache of Lucene to return the correct values when > : working > : with TrieField with the precisionStep higher than 0. If not, what did I > get > : wrong? > > Yes -- the code for building FieldCaches from Trie fields is smart enough > to ensure that only the "real" original values are used to populate the > Cache > > (See for example: FieldCache.NUMERIC_UTILS_INT_PARSER and the classes > linked to from it's javadocs... > > > https://lucene.apache.org/core/4_4_0/core/org/apache/lucene/search/FieldCache.html#NUMERIC_UTILS_INT_PARSER > > https://lucene.apache.org/core/4_4_0/core/org/apache/lucene/util/NumericUtils.html > > https://lucene.apache.org/core/4_4_0/core/org/apache/lucene/document/IntField.html > > (Solr's Trie fields are backed by the various numeric fields in lucene -- > ie: solr:TrieIntField -> lucene:IntField. the "Trie*" prefix is used in > solr because there already had classes named IntField, DoubleField, etc... > when the Trie based impls where added to lucene) > > > -Hoss > -- ______________________________________________ Masurel Paul e-mail: paul.masu...@gmail.com