What about setting a default value for the field? That is probably
faster than negative search clauses?
Regards,
Alex.
http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced
On 16 April 2017 at 23:58, Mikhail Khludnev wrote:
> +name:test +(type:research (*:* -type:[*
+name:test +(type:research (*:* -type:[* TO *]))
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Furkan KAMACI
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a schema like:
>
> name,
> department,
> type
>
> type is an optional field. Some documents don't have that field. Let's
> assume I have these:
>
> Doc 1:
> name: test
> type:
Hi,
I have a schema like:
name,
department,
type
type is an optional field. Some documents don't have that field. Let's
assume I have these:
Doc 1:
name: test
type: research
Doc 2:
name: test
type: developer
Doc 3:
name: test
I want to search name: test and type:research if type field exists
Thank you all very much for your answers. That definitely explains it.
All the best,
Johannes
> Am 13.04.2017 um 17:03 schrieb Erick Erickson :
>
> bq: Why is it possible then to alter replicationFactor via
> MODIFYCOLLECTION in the collections API
>
> Because MODIFYCOLLECTION just changes prope
Hello,
>From what I understand, the AnalyzingInfixSuggester is using a simple
Lucene query; so I was wondering, how then would this suggester have better
performance than using a simple Solr 'select' query on a regular Solr index
(with an asterisk placed at the start and end of the query string).
