>>*There are lot's of docs with the same value, I mention that because I
supose that same value has nothing to do with the number of un-inverted term
instances.
It has to do, I've been able to reproduce teh error by setting different
values to each field:
HTTP Status 500 - there are more terms th
Thanks, that's very useful info. However can't reproduce the error. I've
created and index where all documents have a multivalued date field and each
document have a minimum of one value in that field. (most of the docs have 2
or 3). So, the number of un-inverted term instances is greater than
the
Chris Hostetter-3 wrote:
>
> sorting on a multivalued is defined to have un-specified behavior. it
> might fail with an error, or it might fail silently.
>
I learned this the hard way, it failed silently for a long time until it
failed with an error:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Diffe
: I just like play with things. First checked the behavior of sorting on
: multiValued field and what I noticed was, let's say you have docs with field
sorting on a multivalued is defined to have un-specified behavior. it
might fail with an error, or it might fail silently.
fundementally solr
Curiosity is good . Do be aware, though, that the behavior is not
guaranteed,
it's just "how things happen to work" and may change without warning
Erick
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Marc Sturlese wrote:
>
> >>Well, sorting requires that all the unique values in the target field
> >>get l
>>Well, sorting requires that all the unique values in the target field
>>get loaded into memory
That's what I tought, thanks.
>>But a larger question is whether what your doing is worthwhile
>>even as just a measurement. You say
>>"This is good for me, I don't care for my tests". I claim that
>>
Well, sorting requires that all the unique values in the target field
get loaded into memory, so it's possible that's the culprit. This
would likely only show up if you have a relatively small test set,
or the multivalued entries that you added are new to your corpus.
To test this stab in the dark,
Hey Erik,
I am currently sorting by a multiValued. It apears a feature tha't you may
not know wich of the fields of the multiValued field makes the document be
in that position. This is good for me, I don't care for my tests.
What I need to know if there is any performance issue in all of this.
Th
I mean sorting the query results, not facets.
I am asking because I have added a multivalued field that has as much 10
values. But 70% of the docs has just 1 or 2 fields of this multiValued
field. I am not doing faceting.
Since I have added the multiValued field, "java old gen" seems to get full
m
.hatc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 10:32 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: performance sorting multivalued field
do you mean sorting facets? or sorting search results? you can't
sort search results by a multivalued field - which value would it use?
Er
do you mean sorting facets? or sorting search results? you can't
sort search results by a multivalued field - which value would it use?
Erik
On Jun 18, 2010, at 12:45 PM, Marc Sturlese wrote:
hey there!
can someone explain me how impacts to have multivalued fields when
sorting?
11 matches
Mail list logo
