On Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 06:31:19PM -0400, Erick Erickson said:
> I'm confused. What do you mean that a user can "set any
> number of arbitrarily named fields on a document". It sounds
> like you are talking about a user adding arbitrarily may entries
> to a multi-valued field? Or is it some kind of key:value pairs
> in a field in your schema?
Users can add arbitary key/values to documents. Kind of like Machine
Tags.
So whilst a document has some standard fields (e.g title="My Random
Document", user="Simon", date="2010-10-11") I might have added
current_temp_in_c="32" to one of my documents but you might have put
time_taken_to_write_in_mins="30".
We currently don't index these fields but we'd like to and be able to
have users sort on them.
Ideas I had:
- Everytime a user adds a new field (e.g time_taken_to_write_in_mins)
update the global schema
But that would be horrible and would create an index with many thousands
of fields.
- Give each user their own core and update each individual schema
Better but still inelegant
The multi valued field idea occurred to me because I could have, for
example
user_field: [time_taken_to_write_in_mins=30, current_temp_in_c=32]
(i.e flatten the key/value)
I could then maybe write something that allowed sorting only on matched
values of multi-value field.
sort=user_field:time_taken_to_write_in_mins=*
or
fq=user_field:time_taken_to_write_in_mins=*&sort=user_field
It was just an idea though and I was hoping that there would be a
simpler more orthodox way of doing it.
thanks,
Simon
