Ok thanks for the responses. My option #2 will be easier to implement than having the new doc with combinations so will give it a try. But that has opened my eyes to different possibilities!
-----Original Message----- From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2011 8:55 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Schema Design Question Of your first two options, I'd go with a multi-valued field for each book (1). But kenf_nc's suggestion is a good one too. On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 3:54 AM, kenf_nc <ken.fos...@realestate.com> wrote: > create a separate document for each book-bookshelf combination. > doc 1 = book 1,shelf 1 > doc 2 = book 1,shelf 3 > doc 3 = book 2,shelf 1 > etc. > > then your queries are q=book_id to get all bookshelfs a given book > is on or q=shelf_id to get all books on a given bookshelf. > > Biggest problem people face with Solr schema design is thinking either > object orientedly or RDBMs orientedly. You need to think differently. > Solr/Lucene find text and they find it very fast over huge amounts of data. > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Schema-Design-Question-tp2939045p29 > 42809.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. >
