You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to solr-commits@lucene.apache.org by Apache Wiki <wi...@apache.org> on 2007/05/05 02:18:04 UTC
[Solr Wiki] Update of "Solr1.2" by ryan
Dear Wiki user,
You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Solr Wiki" for change notification.
The following page has been changed by ryan:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/Solr1%2e2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<requestParsers enableRemoteStreaming="false" multipartUploadLimitInKB="2048" />
}}}
+ * audit schema.xml duplicate field definition behavior. As is {{
+ <fieldType name="aaa" ... />
+ <fieldType name="aaa" ... />
+
+ <field name="aaa" ... />
+ <field name="aaa" ... />
+
+ <dynamicField name="aaa_*" ... />
+ <dynamicField name="aaa_*" ... />
+ }} quietly continues -- tossing out the first definition. This should add a severe error and optionally abort (using SOLR-179)
+
* Consider upgrading lucene versions after an audit of the changes. there have been some good bug fixes and optimizations.
== would be nice ==
Re: [Solr Wiki] Update of "Solr1.2" by ryan
Posted by Ryan McKinley <ry...@gmail.com>.
Mike Klaas wrote:
> On 5/4/07, Apache Wiki <wi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> <requestParsers enableRemoteStreaming="false"
>> multipartUploadLimitInKB="2048" />
>> }}}
>>
>> + * audit schema.xml duplicate field definition behavior. As is {{
>> + <fieldType name="aaa" ... />
>> + <fieldType name="aaa" ... />
>> +
>> + <field name="aaa" ... />
>> + <field name="aaa" ... />
>> +
>> + <dynamicField name="aaa_*" ... />
>> + <dynamicField name="aaa_*" ... />
>> + }} quietly continues -- tossing out the first definition. This
>> should add a severe error and optionally abort (using SOLR-179)
>> +
>
> Your description is clear, but not the example. Is it a problem if a
> fieldType and field have the same name, or just two fields? Also, the
> field/dyn field definition seems okay (because of the underscore).
> Perhaps we should enforce * to match something (like .+)?
>
Sorry, the problem is not between the various types, it is within them.
There is no problem with "aaa" as both a fieldType and field. I have
not done the audit yet, so i can't fully describe what happens in each
case.
I noticed was:
<field name="aaa" type="text" ... />
<field name="aaa" type="string" ... />
the first field (with type text) is quietly thrown away and it uses the
second.
I looked quickly at the other cases and looks like fieldType does the
same thing. dynamicField are different in that it will ignore the
second one.
It is an easy fix just to check if anything comes out of the map when
you put something in.
ryan
Re: [Solr Wiki] Update of "Solr1.2" by ryan
Posted by Mike Klaas <mi...@gmail.com>.
On 5/4/07, Apache Wiki <wi...@apache.org> wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> <requestParsers enableRemoteStreaming="false" multipartUploadLimitInKB="2048" />
> }}}
>
> + * audit schema.xml duplicate field definition behavior. As is {{
> + <fieldType name="aaa" ... />
> + <fieldType name="aaa" ... />
> +
> + <field name="aaa" ... />
> + <field name="aaa" ... />
> +
> + <dynamicField name="aaa_*" ... />
> + <dynamicField name="aaa_*" ... />
> + }} quietly continues -- tossing out the first definition. This should add a severe error and optionally abort (using SOLR-179)
> +
Your description is clear, but not the example. Is it a problem if a
fieldType and field have the same name, or just two fields? Also, the
field/dyn field definition seems okay (because of the underscore).
Perhaps we should enforce * to match something (like .+)?
-MIke
Re: [Solr Wiki] Update of "Solr1.2" by ryan
Posted by Mike Klaas <mi...@gmail.com>.
On 5/4/07, Apache Wiki <wi...@apache.org> wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> <requestParsers enableRemoteStreaming="false" multipartUploadLimitInKB="2048" />
> }}}
>
> + * audit schema.xml duplicate field definition behavior. As is {{
> + <fieldType name="aaa" ... />
> + <fieldType name="aaa" ... />
> +
> + <field name="aaa" ... />
> + <field name="aaa" ... />
> +
> + <dynamicField name="aaa_*" ... />
> + <dynamicField name="aaa_*" ... />
> + }} quietly continues -- tossing out the first definition. This should add a severe error and optionally abort (using SOLR-179)
> +
Your description is clear, but not the example. Is it a problem if a
fieldType and field have the same name, or just two fields? Also, the
field/dyn field definition seems okay (because of the underscore).
Perhaps we should enforce * to match something (like .+)?
-MIke