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 figuring out which pattern matched at index time, which is such a tiny portion of the cost of indexing that I doubt you could measure it. Best, Erick On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Saumitra Srivastav <saumitra.srivast...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have a collection with 200 fields and >300M docs running in cloud mode. > Each doc have around 20 fields. I now have a use case where I need to > replace these explicit fields with 6 dynamic fields. Each of these 200 > fields will match one of the 6 dynamic field. > > I am evaluating performance implications of switching to dynamicFields. I > have tested with a smaller dataset(5M docs) but didn't noticed any indexing > or query performance degradation. > > Query on dynamic fields will either be faceting, range query or full text > search. > > Are there any known performance issues with using dynamicFields instead of > explicit ones? > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Dynamic-Field-Performance-tp4158737.html > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
