Andrey Klochkov wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
Thats a tall order. It almost sounds as if you want to be able to not use
the index to store fields, but have them still fully functional as if
indexed. That would be quite the magic trick.
Look here, people
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
> Thats a tall order. It almost sounds as if you want to be able to not use
> the index to store fields, but have them still fully functional as if
> indexed. That would be quite the magic trick.
Look here, people wanted exactly the same featu
>
>>
>> Our index could be much smaller if we could store some of fields not in
>> index directly but in some kind of external storage.
>> All I've found until now is ExternalFileField class which shows that it's
>> possible to implement such a storage, but I'm quite sure that the
>> requirement is
Andrey Klochkov wrote:
Hi Solr users
Our index could be much smaller if we could store some of fields not in
index directly but in some kind of external storage.
All I've found until now is ExternalFileField class which shows that it's
possible to implement such a storage, but I'm quite sure tha
Hi Solr users
Our index could be much smaller if we could store some of fields not in
index directly but in some kind of external storage.
All I've found until now is ExternalFileField class which shows that it's
possible to implement such a storage, but I'm quite sure that the
requirement is comm
