On 3/8/07, Debra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I could create a list of field name + type, but doing so I might as well create it and add it to fields in schema.xml.
<> Alternative solution: write a SQL schema <-> Solr schema mapper. Should be relatively simple, as long as you are confining yourself to flat tables. Or, it could provide the mapping on the fly going into and out of Solr.
In general, I wonder if adding the suffix for dynamic fields is not posing some usability tradeoff. I think, For a user (not a programmer) it's not intuitive to think of id as an integer and therefore enter id_i when searching, what do you think?
In my experience, it is very common for SQL schemata to include suffices indicates the datatype of the field. As we've discussed, Solr needs some way of distinguishing that a field is a given type, so it is infeasible to simply drop the suffix. If you think it should go, there has to be some kind of alternatice mechanism for recognizing dynamic field types. cheers, -Mike
