Re: is this the right way to go?

g is about unique. I thought it was unique "field value". If it means unique term, for English even loading all around 300,000 terms it won't take much memory, right? (Suppose the average length of term is 10, the total memory usage is 10*300,000=3MB) Thanks again, this helps a l

Re: sort field should not be tokenized?

Thanks Eric for the detailed explanation. Now I understand what Ian means. -Fujian -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/sort-field-should-not-be-tokenized-tp882569p884107.html Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com

is this the right way to go?

), we do the sorting "manually". This requires us write our own sorting methods and it needs to support multiple field sort. so my question is is this the right way to go? or maybe lucene/solr already has the similiar thing? Thank you very much, -Fujian -- View this message in

why lucene loads field value for every doc (not only the matched docs) when doing sort?

r the performance? Is there a way to avoid this? I mean maybe lucene should give users another option not to load values for all docs. Thanks, -Fujian -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/why-lucene-loads-field-value-for-every-doc-not-only-the-matched-docs-when-doing

sort field should not be tokenized?

zed in terms of sort? Why in javadoc and "Lucene in Action" they all mention that the sort field should not be tokenzied? Thanks, -Fujian -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/sort-field-should-not-be-tokenized-tp882569p882569.html Sent from the Lucene - J