Hello, I prefer individual fields because this allows one to apply different query boosting and other nice (e)dismax things on different fields. With a catch-all field you lose that. Yes, to have highlighting you need to store fields you want to use for highlighting.
See http://search-lucene.com/?q=solr+catchall+%22catch+all%22+catch-all Otis -- Performance Monitoring - http://sematext.com/spm/index.html Search Analytics - http://sematext.com/search-analytics/index.html On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Rajarshi Guha <rajarshi.g...@gmail.com>wrote: > Hi, we're using Solr 3.6 to index and search a number of entities. The > entities have a large number of fields and to enable full text search > across all the fields I created a catch-all text field which is indexed. > > Initially I stored the field allowing me to highlight the matching fragment > in the catch all field > > However, the field is generally very large and was leading to poor > performance. As a result we no longer store it and thus cannot do > highlighting. > > My questions are: > > 1) Is it preferable to have such a catch all field that collapses multiple > fields? Or is it better to have fields separate and use the DisMax parser? > > 2) Must fields be stored to support highlighting? If so, what is good > practice when one has many fields and would like to include them all when > running a query *and* support highlighting? > > Any pointers would be appreciated > > -- > Rajarshi Guha | http://blog.rguha.net > NIH Center for Advancing Translational Science >
