Re: Solr Dynamic Field Performance

@Bill: Well, if you're creating 5,000 dynamic fields, whether from lots of matches to a few patterns or 5,000 patterns, you deserve what you get ;). Notice I was careful to say: bq: Dynamic fields, once they are actually _in_ a document aren't any different than statically defined fields So whi

Re: Solr Dynamic Field Performance

@Bill: Well, if you're creating 5,000 dynamic fields, whether from lots of matches to a few patterns or 5,000 patterns, you deserve what you get ;). Notice I was careful to say: bq: Dynamic fields, once they are actually _in_ a document aren't any different than statically defined fields So whi

Re: Solr Dynamic Field Performance

: : : Just to confirm, the fieldCache doesn't store anything extra when we use : dynamic fields and do sorting query on that...right? the way the FieldCache works, is that it has to "cache" a value for every document -- even if

Re: Solr Dynamic Field Performance

Thanks for reply Erick. I found this article: http://e-mats.org/2011/01/solr-memory-usage-and-dynamic-fields/ Just to confirm, the fieldCache doesn't store anything extra when we use dynamic fields and do sorting query on that...

Re: Solr Dynamic Field Performance

How about perf if you dynamically create 5000 fields ? Bill Bell Sent from mobile > On Sep 14, 2014, at 10:06 AM, Erick Erickson wrote: > > Dynamic fields, once they are actually _in_ a document, aren't any > different than statically defined fields. Literally, there's no place > in the search

Re: Solr Dynamic Field Performance

Dynamic fields, once they are actually _in_ a document, aren't any different than statically defined fields. Literally, there's no place in the search code that I know of that _ever_ has to check whether a field was dynamically or statically defined. AFAIK, the only additional cost would be figuri