You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@lucene.apache.org by "Chris M. Hostetter (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2020/09/15 15:57:00 UTC
[jira] [Comment Edited] (SOLR-14859) [* TO *] queries on DateRange
fields miss results
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14859?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17196263#comment-17196263 ]
Chris M. Hostetter edited comment on SOLR-14859 at 9/15/20, 3:56 PM:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
{quote}Warning in response saying this is not allowed and ignored or log warning? ...
{quote}
I'm not sure what "response" you're talking about?
My understand (based on your diagnoses) is that the "root" of the problem has noething to do with the request time query parsing: it's that {{DateRangeField}} can be configured with -- and defaults to {{omitNorms="false"}} even though the underlying (lucene) FieldType _always_ uses {{FIELD_TYPE.setOmitNorms(true);}}
What i'm saying is that:
* the "defaults" in {{DateRangeField}} should be changed to be based on the static {{FIELD_TYPE}} you pointed out (for both {{omitNorms}} and {{omitTermFreqAndPositions}})
* {{DateRangeField.init()}} and {{DateRangeField.checkSchemaField()}} should log a warning if someone tries to configure a fieldType or field that violates these defaults
(And obviously the docs for {{DateRangeField}} should be updated as well)
was (Author: hossman):
{quote}Warning in response saying this is not allowed and ignored or log warning? ...
{quote}
I'm not sure what "response" you're talking about?
My understand (based on your diagnoses) is that the "root" of the problem has noething to do with the request time query parsing: it's that {{DateRangeField}} can be configured with -- and defaults to {{omitNorms="false"}} even though the underlying (lucene) FieldType _always_ uses {{FIELD_TYPE.setOmitNorms(true);}}
What i'm saying is that:
* the "defaults" in {{DateRangeField}} should be changed to be based on the static {{FIELD_TYPE}} you pointed out (for both {{omitNorms}} and {{omitTermFreqAndPositions}})
* {{DateRangeField.init()}} and {{DateRangeField.init()}} should log a warning if someone tries to configure a fieldType or field that violates these defaults
(And obviously the docs for {{DateRangeField}} should be updated as well)
> [* TO *] queries on DateRange fields miss results
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-14859
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14859
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Components: query parsers
> Affects Versions: 8.5
> Reporter: Jason Gerlowski
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: SOLR-14859.patch, query-debug.png, reproduce.sh, schema.png
>
>
> "exists" queries ({{[* TO *]}}) on DateRange fields return 0 results regardless of docs in the index with values in that field.
> The issue appears to be that the query is converted into a {{NormsFieldExistsQuery}}, even though DateRangeField uses omitNorms=true by default. Probably introduced by SOLR-11746's changes to these optimizable range queries.
> I've attached a script to reproduce the issue (tested on Solr 8.6.2) and screenshots showing showing schema and query-parsing info for the reproduction.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org