Re: Return 2 fields per facet.. name and id, for example? / facet value search

[Shalin Shekhar Mangar <sh...@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 12:57 AM, Rihaed Tan <ta...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have a similar requirement to Matthew (from his post 2 years ago). Is
> this
> still the way to go in storing both the ID and name/value for facet values?
> I'm planning to use id#name format if this is still the case and doing a
> prefix query. I believe this is a common requirement so I'd appreciate if
> any of you guys can share what's the best way to do it.
>
> Also, I'm indexing the facet values for text search as well. Should the
> field declaration below suffice the requirement?
>
> <field name="category" type="text" indexed="true" stored="true"
> required="true" multiValued="true"/>
>

There have been talks of having a pair field type in Solr but there is no
patch yet. So I guess the way proposed by Yonik is a good solution.

-- 
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.

Re: Return 2 fields per facet.. name and id, for example? / facet value search

["R. Tan" <ta...@gmail.com>]

Thanks. I guess it will have to be the workaround then.

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar <
shalinmangar@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 12:57 AM, Rihaed Tan <ta...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have a similar requirement to Matthew (from his post 2 years ago). Is
> > this
> > still the way to go in storing both the ID and name/value for facet
> values?
> > I'm planning to use id#name format if this is still the case and doing a
> > prefix query. I believe this is a common requirement so I'd appreciate if
> > any of you guys can share what's the best way to do it.
> >
> > Also, I'm indexing the facet values for text search as well. Should the
> > field declaration below suffice the requirement?
> >
> > <field name="category" type="text" indexed="true" stored="true"
> > required="true" multiValued="true"/>
> >
>
> There have been talks of having a pair field type in Solr but there is no
> patch yet. So I guess the way proposed by Yonik is a good solution.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
>