[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6003?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13980415#comment-13980415 ]
Shawn Heisey commented on SOLR-6003: ------------------------------------ "I thought of it later" followup: Instead of a flag, put a Collection<String> field (which we might want to explicitly declare as a Set) in the schema object that contains all the field names that must be present in an atomic update request to avoid data loss. Log a warning if any of those fields are missing from an atomic update. > JSON Update increment field with non-stored fields causes subtle problems > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: SOLR-6003 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6003 > Project: Solr > Issue Type: Bug > Components: update > Affects Versions: 4.7.1 > Reporter: Kingston Duffie > > In our application we have large multi-field documents. We occasionally need > to increment one of the numeric fields or add a value to a multi-value text > field. This appears to work correctly using JSON update. But later we > discovered that documents were disappearing from search results and > eventually found the documentation that indicates that to use field > modification you must store all fields of the document. > Perhaps you will argue that you need to impose this restriction -- which I > would hope could be overcome because of the cost of us having to store all > fields. But in any case, it would be better for others if you could return > an error if someone tries to update a field on documents with non-stored > fields. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.2#6252) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org