Hi Björn, > > 1.) Are these equivalent field definitions? > > Old: > > <fieldType name="long" class="solr.TrieLongField" precisionStep="0" > positionIncrementGap="0”/> > > New: > > <fieldType name="long" class="solr.LongPointField" docValues="true”/> > > I cannot find anything about precisionStep and positionIncrementGap for > the new fields and assume that docValues will take care of that in some way? >
"precisionStep" and "positionIncrementGap" aren't used with PointFields. "docValues" serve a similar purpose in *Point fields than they did in Trie* fields, to be used for sorting/faceting. They can also improve the query performance in some cases. > > 2.) Do we need to reindex after the scheme change? > > We have a large collections and are serving requests 24/7. Is a full index > required or is Solr/Lucene able to handle both field types until everything > is updated? > > Yes, and not only you need to reindex, you can't do it in-place using the same fields, you have to either create a new index (either a new collection or delete the old index before reindexing) or use new fields. If you want to reindex on top of your existing collection you could: 1) Add a new set of fields that use the new number types (i.e. long_point, int_point...) 2) Reindex all data making sure the new fields are populated in addition to the old ones (you could use copyFields for this) 3) Once all reindex is done, change your queries to use the new fields. At this point you can remove the old fields from the schema and stop setting them when you index Hope this helps, Tomás > > Thank you > Björn > >
