> I would create a new core as slave of the existing configuration without > replicating the core schema and configuration. This way I can get the
This won't work, as master/slave replication copies the index files as-is. You should re-index all your data. You don't need to take down the cluster to do that, just re-index on top of what's there already, and your index will become smaller and smaller as merging kicks out the old data :) -- Jan Høydahl, search solution architect Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com 24. apr. 2013 kl. 15:59 skrev Majirus FANSI <majirus....@gmail.com>: > I would create a new core as slave of the existing configuration without > replicating the core schema and configuration. This way I can get the > information from one index to the other while saving the space as fields in > the new schema are mainly not stored. After the replication I would swap > the cores for the online core to point to the right index dir and conf. > i.e. the one with less stored fields. > > Maj > > > On 24 April 2013 01:48, Petersen, Robert > <robert.peter...@mail.rakuten.com>wrote: > >> Hey I just want to verify one thing before I start doing this: function >> queries only require fields to be indexed but don't require them to be >> stored right? >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Petersen, Robert [mailto:robert.peter...@mail.rakuten.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:39 PM >> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: RE: Solr 3.6.1: changing a field from stored to not stored >> >> Good info, Thanks Hoss! I was going to add a more specific fl= parameter >> to my queries at the same time. Currently I am doing fl=*,score so that >> will have to be changed. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:18 PM >> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Solr 3.6.1: changing a field from stored to not stored >> >> >> : index? I noticed I am unnecessarily storing some fields in my index and >> : I'd like to stop storing them without having to 'reindex the world' and >> : let the changes just naturally percolate into my index as updates come >> : in the normal course of things. Do you guys think I could get away with >> : this? >> >> Yes, you can easily get away with this type of change w/o re-indexing, >> however you won't gain any immediate index size savings until each and >> every existing doc has been reindexed and the old copies expunged from the >> index via segment merges. >> >> the one hicup thta can affect people when doing this is what happens if >> you use something like "fl=*" (and likely "hl=*" as well) ... many places >> in Solr will try to "avoid failure" if a stored field is found in the index >> which isn't defined in the schema, and treat that stored value as a string >> (legacy behavior designed to make it easier for people to point Solr at old >> lucene indexes built w/o using Solr) ... so if these stored values are not >> strings, you might get some weird data in your response for these documents. >> >> >> -Hoss >> >> >> >> >>
