[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6892?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14259665#comment-14259665
]
Jack Krupansky commented on SOLR-6892:
--------------------------------------
Thanks for the description updates. Comments...
1. We need to be explicit about how and when the hard-wired processors are
invoked. In particular the "run update" processor. The "log update" processor
is somewhat special in that it is not mandatory, but a lot of people are not
explicitly aware of it, so if they leave it out, they will be wondering why
they don't get logging of updates.
2. I suggest three parameters: "pre.processors" to specify processors before
the default chain, "post.processors" to specify processors after the default
chain (before or after "run update" and "log update"??), and "processors" to
specify a processor list to completely replace the default chain.
3. Make "log update" be automatically added at the end unless a "nolog"
processor is specified.
4. Make "run update" be automatically added at the end unless a "norun"
processor is specified.
5. Discuss "processor" vs. "processors" - I prefer the latter since it is
explicit, but maybe allow both since the singular/plural can be confusing.
6. Consider supporting both a single parameter with a csv list as well as
multiple parameters each with a single value. I prefer having the choice.
Having a separate parameter for each processor can be more explicit sometimes.
7. Consider a single-processor parameter with the option to specify the
parameters for that processor. That would make it possible to invoke the
various field mutating update processors, which would be especially cool and
convenient.
> Make it possible to define update request processors as toplevel components
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-6892
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6892
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Noble Paul
> Assignee: Noble Paul
>
> The current update processor chain is rather cumbersome and we should be able
> to use the updateprocessors without a chain.
> The scope of this ticket is
> * A new tag <updateProcessor> becomes a toplevel tag and it will be
> equivalent to the {{<processor>}} tag inside
> {{<updateRequestProcessorChain>}} . The only difference is that it should
> require a {{name}} attribute. The {{<updateProcessorChain>}} tag will
> continue to exist and it should be possible to define <processor> inside as
> well . It should also be possible to reference a named URP in a chain.
> * Any update request will be able to pass a param {{processor=a,b,c}} ,
> where a,b,c are names of update processors. A just in time chain will be
> created with those URPs
> * Some in built update processors (wherever possible) will be predefined with
> standard names and can be directly used in requests
> * What happens when I say processor=a,b,c in a request? It will execute the
> default chain after the just-in-time chain {{a->b->c}} .
> * How to execute a different chain other than the default chain? the same old
> mechanism of update.chain=x means that the chain {{x}} will be applied after
> {{a,b,c}}
> * How to avoid the default processor chain from being executed ? There will
> be an implicit URP called {{STOP}} . send your request as
> processor=a,b,c,STOP.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
