s that are available for the complete
month, which will be the case for a large percentage of assets, I just mark
with a flag, which avoids me creating a rect for that entry all together. Eric.
> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:00:45 -0700
> From: [hidden
> email]
> To: [hidden email]
>
or a large percentage of assets, I just mark
with a flag, which avoids me creating a rect for that entry all together. Eric.
> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:00:45 -0700
> From: dsmi...@mitre.org
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Issue using SpatialRecursivePrefixTreeFieldType
Eric,
Can you please elaborate on your workaround? I'm not sure I get your drift.
~ David
On Oct 16, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Eric Khoury [via Lucene] wrote:
>
> Thanks for the help David, makes sense. I found a workaround, creating much
> smaller rectangles and updating them more often.Glad to ha
Subject: Re: Issue using SpatialRecursivePrefixTreeFieldType
>
> Hi again Eric,
> I could see this unusual use-case of Lucene/Solr spatial really stressing
> it out. When you say that you "create a rectangle", I figure you mean at
> indexing time -- I'm pretty c
Hi David, I'm defining my field as such: When I create a large
rectangle, say "10 10 500 11", Solr seems to freeze for quite some time. I
haven't looked at your code, but I can imagine the algorithm basically fills in
some sort of indexing matrix, and that's what's taking so long for larg
