Hi David, We tried using copyfields, and we can get this to work, but it's not exactly what we want because we need to use a common type. E.g.,
================================ <!-- REGULAR FIELDS --> <field name="id" type="simple" indexed="true" stored="true" required="true" multiValued="false" /> <field name="name" type="simple" indexed="true" stored="false" required="false" multiValued="false" /> <field name="organism" type="complex" indexed="true" stored="false" required="false" multiValued="false" /> <!-- DF FIELD --> <field name="content" type="complex" indexed="true" stored="false" multiValued="true" /> <!-- COPY FIELDS --> <copyField source="id" dest="content" /> <copyField source="name" dest="content" /> <copyField source="organism" dest="content" /> ================================ Then if our "df" is specified as the "content" field, we can search over "id", "name" and "organism" in one swoop. However, "content" has a different type to "id" and "name", and so our search results might be different than if we had searched directly on "id" or "name". e.g., q=id:value1 // hits id field, which uses the "simple" type q=value1 // hits content field, which uses the "complex" type ... so results might differ between the two queries I hope this clarifies our question? Best, Edd -------------------- Edward Turner On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 at 15:03, David Hastings <hastings.recurs...@gmail.com> wrote: > why not use a copyfield for indexing? > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 9:59 AM Edward Turner <eddtur...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Is it possible to have multiple "df" fields? (We think the answer is no > > because our experiments did not work when adding multiple "df" values to > > solrconfig.xml -- but we just wanted to double check with those who know > > better.) The reason we would like to do this is that we have two main > field > > types (with different analyzers) and we'd like queries without a field to > > be searched over both of them. We could also use copyfields, but this > would > > require us to have a common analyzer, which isn't exactly what we want. > > > > An alternative solution is to pre-process the query prior to sending it > to > > Solr, so that queries with no field are changed as follows: > > > > q=value -> q=(field1:value OR field2:value) > > > > ... however, we feel a bit uncomfortable doing this though via String > > manipulation. > > > > Is there an obvious way we should tackle this problem that we are missing > > (e.g., which would be cleaner/safer and perhaps works at the Query object > > level)? > > > > Many thanks and best wishes, > > > > Edd > > >
