Ahmet, So, this is an interesting difference between Lucene (and ES) and Solr. In Lucene, the idea seems to be that you package up a reusable analysis chain as an analyzer. Saying 'use analyzer X' is less complex than saying 'use tokenizer T and filters F1, F2, ...'.
thanks, benson On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Ahmet Arslan <iori...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi Benson, > > Using lucene analyzer in schema.xlm should be last resort. For very specific > reasons : if you have an existing analyzer, etc. > > Ahmet > > > On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 11:52 PM, Benson Margulies > <ben...@basistech.com> wrote: > http://wiki.apache.org/solr/AnalyzersTokenizersTokenFilters never > mentions an Analyzer class. > > http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPlugins talks about subclasses of > SolrAnalyzer as ways of delivering an entire analysis chain and still > 'minding the gap'. > > Anyone care to offer a comparison of the viewpoints? >
