that is what I thought. Thanks. On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar < shalinman...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You'll need to re-index. > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Jim Adams <jasolru...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > It's a range query. I don't have any faceted data. > > > > Can I limit the precision of the existing field, or must I re-index? > > > > Thanks. > > > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Yonik Seeley <ysee...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Jim Adams <jasolru...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Are there any particular suggestions on memory size for a machine? I > > > have a > > > > box that has only 1 million records on it - yet I'm finding that date > > > > searches are already unacceptable (30 seconds) slow. Other searches > > seem > > > > okay though. > > > > > > I assume this is a date range query (or date faceting)? > > > Range queries with many unique terms in the range is a known > > > limitation, and we should hopefully fix this in 1.4. > > > In the meantime, limiting the precision of dates could help a great > deal. > > > > > > -Yonik > > > > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Shalin Shekhar Mangar. >
