So, basically, yes, it is a real problem and there is no designed solution? e.g. optional sub-schema files that can be turned off and on?
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Erik Hatcher <erik.hatc...@gmail.com>wrote: > > On Oct 23, 2011, at 19:34 , Fred Zimmerman wrote: > > it seems from my limited experience thus far that as new data types are > > added, schema.xml will tend to become bloated with many different field > and > > fieldtype definitions. Is this a problem in real life, and if so, what > > strategies are used to address it? > > ... by keeping your schema lean and clean, only with what YOU need in it. > Granted, I'd personally keep all the built-in Solr primitive field types > defined even if I didn't use them, but there aren't very many and don't > really clutter things up. > > Defined fields should ONLY be what you need for your application, and > generally that should be a tractable (and necessary) reasonably sized set. > > Erik >
