Re: performance between ExternalFileField and Join

2012-03-06 Thread Chris Hostetter
: unique terms) but I agree with Erik on the ExternalFileField as you can use : it just inside a function query, for example, for boosting. with {!frange} it would be trivial to filter based on values in an ExternalFileField ... whether that would be *faster* then a custom plugin that worked sim

Re: performance between ExternalFileField and Join

2012-03-01 Thread Tommaso Teofili
Also regarding the Join functionality I remember Yonik pointed out it's O(# unique terms) but I agree with Erik on the ExternalFileField as you can use it just inside a function query, for example, for boosting. Tommaso 2012/3/1 Erick Erickson > Hmmm. ExternalFileFields can only be float values,

Re: performance between ExternalFileField and Join

2012-03-01 Thread Erick Erickson
Hmmm. ExternalFileFields can only be float values, so I'm not sure "the necessary data" is straight-forward. Additionally, they are used in function queries. Does this still work? I really don't know the performance characteristics if, say, you have users with access to all documents for SOLR-2272

performance between ExternalFileField and Join

2012-02-27 Thread Kevin Osborn
I am looking at two different options to filter results in Solr, basically a per-user access control list. Our index is about 2.5 million documents The first option is to use ExternalFieldField. It seems pretty straightforward. Just put the necessary data in the files and query against that data.