Hmmmm, Why isn't q helpful? You can specify field:value pairs
for a q clause. so you can pretty easily tack on an AND check:true.
I'd try that and measure performance before trying more complex
solutions....

Or do I misunderstand the problem?

HTH
Erick

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:21 AM, MitchK <mitc...@web.de> wrote:

>
> Hello community,
>
> I am not sure about what is the best way to handle the following problem:
> I have got an index, let's say with 2mio documents, and there is a
> check-field.
> The check-field contains on boolean values (TRUE/FALSE).
>
> What is the best way to query only documents with a TRUE check-value?
> q, fq or a facetting-index?
>
> When I have a look at fq I think that I am running out of memory, if my
> index is growing too large.
> The normal query (q) seems to be a bad solution, because it's not
> constructed for this use-case.
> What about facetting? I have no idea, whether facetting would be a good
> solution.
>
> If it makes a difference: Most of the queries will be run against true
> check-values.
>
> The only alternative I have in mind is building two indexes; one with
> checked values and one with unchecked (false) values.
>
> Thank you for sharing experiences.
>
> Kind regards,
> - Mitch
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://old.nabble.com/Filter-Query-or-Main-Query-or-facetting--tp27804169p27804169.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

Reply via email to