> > Personally I'd like to see it go - I don't want any
> indeterminate "and
> > the server will do the appropriate thing" in SRW ;-)
> Then you need to map some index and relation to the CQL
> query: "fish"
> Or to the query: "2005-01-07"
Ah, I'd always assumed that these were "server default" rather than
"server choice" i.e. that if you omitted the index the server would
consistently default to one. Whereas "server choice" implies that the
server might use different indexes depending on the query term.
I think that this may stem from a vague recollection of Ralph suggested
the default index for an omitted index be included in the explain record
(I think this discussion may predate the adoption of explain!).
You're saying that whether an omitted index is server default or server
choice is a server decision?