Well, actually you can use fqs, it's just that re-using them becomes a bit
more tricky. Specifically,
fq=field1:blah OR field2:blort
is perfectly reasonable. However, it doesn't break things down into
sub-clauses, so
fq=field1:blah
will create a new entry in the filtercache. And
fq=field2:blort OR field1:blah
will not match the first one.

It kind of depends on the query pattern whether the filtercache will be
re-used, you have to take care to construct the fq clauses with re-use in
mind if you want ORs.

Best,
Erick


On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Kranti Parisa <kranti.par...@gmail.com>wrote:

> I was trying with the  [* TO *] as an example, the real use case is OR
> query between 2/more range queries of timestamp fields (saved in
> milliseconds). So I can't use FQs as they are ANDed by definition.
>
> Am I missing something here?
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Kranti K. Parisa
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:15 AM, Joel Bernstein <joels...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Kranti,
> >
> > The range query also looks like a good candidate to be moved to a filter
> > query so it can be cached.
> >
> > Joel Bernstein
> > Search Engineer at Heliosearch
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 11:34 PM, Smiley, David W. <dsmi...@mitre.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Kranti,
> > >
> > > I can't speak to the specific slow-down while grouping, but if you
> expect
> > > to run [* TO *] queries with any frequency then you should index a
> > boolean
> > > flag and query for that instead.  You might also reduce the
> precisionStep
> > > value for the field you are using to 6 or even 4.  But wow that's a big
> > > difference you noted; it wouldn't hurt to double-check with the
> debugger
> > > that the [* TO *] is treated as a numeric range query instead of a
> > generic
> > > term range.
> > >
> > > ~ David
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: Kranti Parisa [kranti.par...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 10:26 PM
> > > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > Subject: Range queries with Grouping is slow?
> > >
> > > Is there any known issue with Range queries + grouping?
> > >
> > > Case1:
> > > q=id:123&group=true&sort=price
> > > asc&group.field=entityId&group.limit=2&group.ngroups=true
> > >
> > > Case2:
> > > q=id:123 AND price:[* TO *]&group=true&sort=price
> > > asc&group.field=entityId&group.limit=2&group.ngroups=true
> > >
> > > Index Size:10M/~5GB
> > > After running both queries at least once, I was expecting to hit the
> > query
> > > caches and response should be quick enough, but
> > > Case1: 15-20ms (looks fine)
> > > Case2: 400+ms (this seems constantly >400ms even after the first query)
> > >
> > > any thought? if it's a known issue, please point me to the jira link
> > > otherwise I can open an issue if this needs some analysis?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Kranti K. Parisa
> > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to