I have a patch to do this somewhat automatically here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5478
I’m waiting on SOLR-6810 before revisiting the patch.

~ David Smiley
Freelance Apache Lucene/Solr Search Consultant/Developer
http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Toke Eskildsen <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Given a non-tokenized field that has DocValues, the primary (maybe even
> only?) reason for making it stored, seems to be document retrieval. When
> the goal is to construct documents, the base difference between just
> returning the stored values and returning both stored and DocValued
> values seems to be performance: Resolving a non-trivial amount of stored
> values for each document is mostly a bulk operation, while the DocValued
> ones is more random access.
>
> In most of our setups, search-results are divided between overviews
> (classic top-10 or top-20 with most relevant documents) and expanded
> views (separate page or a result box that changes size). The overviews
> have few data and the expanded views have more data. The data for
> overviews needs to be provided quickly (stored), whereas the expanded
> views are one-document-at-a-time and thus does not have the same time
> requirements (DocValue speed is fine).
>
> As non-trivial space (15% in an index I am investigating) can be saved
> by doing DocValue without storing, would it be an idea to provide
> support for retrieving DocValued fields as part of document retrieval?
>
> This could be done in different ways:
>
> * Only return stored values with fl=*. If a field is referenced
>   explicitly with fl=myfield and is DocValued but not stored, return
>   the DocValued value.
>
> * State that DocValued fields, that are not stored, should be returned
>   with a flag: resolvedv=true
>
>
> - Toke Eskildsen, State and University Library, Denmark
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to