[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9288?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15382728#comment-15382728
]
Hoss Man commented on SOLR-9288:
--------------------------------
Ok, so the root cause seems to be this bit of code in DocIdAugmenterFactory...
{code}
public void transform(SolrDocument doc, int docid, float score) {
if( docid >= 0 ) {
doc.setField( name, docid );
}
{code}
At first glance that looks like a conscious choice to not include a docid in
the response for uncommitted docs -- except that according to the logs that bit
of code was added by SOLR-1566 and pre-dates the existence of the transaction
log and RTG.
----
I think we should go ahead and update this transformer return {{-1}} for
uncommitted docs, so people can reliably look for the key in the response and
use the value to know if they are looking at committed/uncommited values,
rather then determine that based on the _presense_ of the key in the response.
> RTG: fl=[docid] silently missing for uncommitted docs
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-9288
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9288
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Reporter: Hoss Man
>
> Found in SOLR-9180 testing.
> when using RTG in a single node solr install, the {{\[docid\]}} transformer
> works for committed docs, but is silently missing from uncommited docs.
> this inconsistency is confusing. It seems like even if there is no valid
> docid to return in this case, the key should still be present in the
> resulting doc.
> I would suggest using either {{null}} or {{-1}} in this case?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
