Thanks for suggestions Erick, Micheal and all. I guess using of single field
as access_control will make sense. we can have access_control_user as multi
value field to hold user list ( hold permission given to user alone
individually ) and another field access_control_group as multi value field
to
You may want to consider a join, esp. if you're ever consider thousands of
groups. e.g.
fq={!join from=access_control_group
to=doc_group}access_control_user_id:USERID
On 18 March 2017 at 05:57, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> > On 3/17/2017 8:11 AM,
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 3/17/2017 8:11 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
>> For Solr 6.4, we've managed to circumvent this for filter queries and
>> other contexts where scoring isn't needed.
>> http://yonik.com/solr-6-4/ "More efficient filter queries"
>
> Nice!
>
> If th
On 3/17/2017 8:11 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> For Solr 6.4, we've managed to circumvent this for filter queries and
> other contexts where scoring isn't needed.
> http://yonik.com/solr-6-4/ "More efficient filter queries"
Nice!
If the filter looks like the following (because q.op=AND), does it sti
And to chime in.
bq: It contains information about who have access to the
documents, like field as (U1_s:true).
I wanted to make explicit the implications of Micael's response.
You are talking about different _fields_ per user or group, i.e.
Don't do this, it's horribly wasteful. Instead as Mich
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
[...]
> Lucene has a global configuration called "maxBooleanClauses" which
> defaults to 1024.
For Solr 6.4, we've managed to circumvent this for filter queries and
other contexts where scoring isn't needed.
http://yonik.com/solr-6-4/ "More ef
On 3/17/2017 12:46 AM, Ganesh M wrote:
> For how many ORs solr can give the results in less than one second.Can
> I pass 100's of OR condtion in the solr query? will that affects the
> performance ?
This is a question that's impossible to answer. The number will vary
depending on the nature of t
Hi Ganesh,
you might want to use something like this:
fq=access_control:(g1 g2 g5 g99 ...)
Then it's only one fq filter per request. Internally it's like an OR condition,
but in a more condensed form. I already have used this with up to 500 values
without larger performance degradation (but i
Hi Shawn / Michael,
Thanks for your replies and I guess you have got my scenarios exactly right.
Initially my document contains information about who have access to the
documents, like field as (U1_s:true). if 100 users can access a document,
we will have 100 such fields for each user.
So when U1
On 3/16/2017 6:02 AM, Ganesh M wrote:
> We have 1 million of documents and would like to query with multiple fq
> values.
>
> We have kept the access_control ( multi value field ) which holds information
> about for which group that document is accessible.
>
> Now to get the list of all the docum
First of all, from what I can see, this won't do what you're expecting.
Multiple fq conditions are always combined using AND, so if a user is
member of 100 groups, but the document is accessible to only 99 of them,
then the user won't find it.
Or in other words, if you add a user to some group
11 matches
Mail list logo
