Hi Chris,
I have opened an issue (SOLR-2146 [1]) following that discussion.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2146
cheers
--
Renaud Delbru
On 14/09/10 01:06, Chris Hostetter wrote:
: Yes, I have thought of that, or even extending field type. But this does not
: work for my use c
: Yes, I have thought of that, or even extending field type. But this does not
: work for my use case, since I can have multiple fields of a same type
: (therefore with the same field type, and same analyzer), but each one of them
: needs specific information. Therefore, I think the only "nice" wa
How about this:
value
It generally would be better to keep the attribute space clean and
make it very clear you are doing something unique to this field.
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Renaud Delbru wrote:
> Hi Charlie,
>
> On 10/09/10 16:11, Charlie Jackson wrote:
>>
>> Have you alrea
Hi Charlie,
On 10/09/10 16:11, Charlie Jackson wrote:
Have you already explored the idea of using a custom analyzer for your
field? Depending on your use case, that might work for you.
Yes, I have thought of that, or even extending field type. But this does
not work for my use case, since I ca
Hi Javier,
On 10/09/10 07:15, Javier Diaz wrote:
Looking at the code we found out that there's no way to extend the schema.
Finally we copied part of the code that reads the schema in our
RequestHandler. It works but I'm not sure if it's the best way to do it. Let
me know if you want our code a
Have you already explored the idea of using a custom analyzer for your
field? Depending on your use case, that might work for you.
- Charlie
Hi Renaud:
Right now we faced the same issue: while developing a new RequestHandler we
needed to add some information per field (in our case to define some fields
as defaultSearchFields). We thought that this could be added externally in a
configuration file or in the schema as new attributes.
Lo
Hi,
so I suppose there is no solution. Is there a chance that SchemaField
becomes extensible in the future ? Because, at the moment, all the field
attributes (indexed, stored, etc.) are hardcoded inside SchemaField. Do
you think it is worth opening an issue about it ?
--
Renaud Delbru
On 07
