One thing I find awkward about convertType is that it is
JdbcDataSource specific, rather than field-specific. Isn't the
current implementation far too broad?
Erik
On Feb 3, 2010, at 1:16 AM, Noble Paul നോബിള്
नोब्ळ् wrote:
implicit conversion can cause problem when Transformers are applied.
It is hard for user to guess the type of the field by looking at the
schema.xml. In Solr, String is the most commonly used type. if you
wish to do numeric operations on a field convertType will cause
problems.
If it is explicitly set, user knows why the type got changed.
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 6:38 PM, Alexey Serba <ase...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
I encountered blob indexing problem and found convertType solution in
FAQ<http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DataImportHandlerFaq#Blob_values_in_my_table_are_added_to_the_Solr_document_as_object_strings_like_B.401f23c5
>
I was wondering why it is not enabled by default and found the
following comment
<http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/169e6cc87dad5e67/dataimporthandler_and_blobs#169e6cc87dad5e67
>in
mailing list:
"We used to attempt type conversion from the SQL type to the
field's given
type. We
found that it was error prone and switched to using the
ResultSet#getObject
for all columns (making the old behavior a configurable option –
"convertType" in JdbcDataSource)."
Why it is error prone? Is it safe enough to enable convertType for
all jdbc
data sources by default? What are the side effects?
Thanks in advance,
Alex
--
-----------------------------------------------------
Noble Paul | Systems Architect| AOL | http://aol.com
