You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to solr-user@lucene.apache.org by Vinci <vi...@polyu.edu.hk> on 2008/04/01 05:56:16 UTC
stored and indexed in schema
Hi,
I would like to ask, if I set a field to be indexed but not stored, I can
retrieved the document but cannot retrieve this field?
If I have large field that I want to index but I am not suppose to show them
to user (The origin content stored in another processed document where I am
using another field in Solr to point to their location...I throw the
retrieval job to the server :P), will I get faster respond even the query
doesn't ask solr to return this large field?
Thank you,
Vinci
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/stored-and-indexed-in-schema-tp16411090p16411090.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: stored and indexed in schema
Posted by Erik Hatcher <er...@ehatchersolutions.com>.
On Apr 1, 2008, at 1:35 PM, Vinci wrote:
> Thank you for your reply, It look like I will have some benefit but
> I will
> also lose the highlighter/summary functionary, it that right?
Ya can't highlight what you don't have. So that's true.
I think eventually it would be handy for Solr to allow the client to
post in some text to be highlighted, but it does not currently
support that.
Erik
>
> Thank you,
> Vinci
>
>
>
> Erik Hatcher wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mar 31, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Vinci wrote:
>>> I would like to ask, if I set a field to be indexed but not stored,
>>> I can
>>> retrieved the document but cannot retrieve this field?
>>
>> That's correct. By definition :)
>>
>>> If I have large field that I want to index but I am not suppose to
>>> show them
>>> to user (The origin content stored in another processed document
>>> where I am
>>> using another field in Solr to point to their location...I throw the
>>> retrieval job to the server :P), will I get faster respond even the
>>> query
>>> doesn't ask solr to return this large field?
>>
>> You'll get better response in that Solr won't be taking the time to
>> retrieve the large stored field, writing it to the response, and the
>> client-side parsing that data, sure.
>>
>> Erik
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/stored-and-
> indexed-in-schema-tp16411090p16419438.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: stored and indexed in schema
Posted by Vinci <vi...@polyu.edu.hk>.
Hi,
Thank you for your reply, It look like I will have some benefit but I will
also lose the highlighter/summary functionary, it that right?
Thank you,
Vinci
Erik Hatcher wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 31, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Vinci wrote:
>> I would like to ask, if I set a field to be indexed but not stored,
>> I can
>> retrieved the document but cannot retrieve this field?
>
> That's correct. By definition :)
>
>> If I have large field that I want to index but I am not suppose to
>> show them
>> to user (The origin content stored in another processed document
>> where I am
>> using another field in Solr to point to their location...I throw the
>> retrieval job to the server :P), will I get faster respond even the
>> query
>> doesn't ask solr to return this large field?
>
> You'll get better response in that Solr won't be taking the time to
> retrieve the large stored field, writing it to the response, and the
> client-side parsing that data, sure.
>
> Erik
>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/stored-and-indexed-in-schema-tp16411090p16419438.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: stored and indexed in schema
Posted by Erik Hatcher <er...@ehatchersolutions.com>.
On Mar 31, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Vinci wrote:
> I would like to ask, if I set a field to be indexed but not stored,
> I can
> retrieved the document but cannot retrieve this field?
That's correct. By definition :)
> If I have large field that I want to index but I am not suppose to
> show them
> to user (The origin content stored in another processed document
> where I am
> using another field in Solr to point to their location...I throw the
> retrieval job to the server :P), will I get faster respond even the
> query
> doesn't ask solr to return this large field?
You'll get better response in that Solr won't be taking the time to
retrieve the large stored field, writing it to the response, and the
client-side parsing that data, sure.
Erik