[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12378?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16484694#comment-16484694
 ] 

Oliver Bates commented on SOLR-12378:
-------------------------------------

{quote}Did you intentionally mispell an existing comment RE "identiy" ?
{quote}
Lol yeah I'm just here to wreak havoc. Actually that typo existed in an older 
version of the file, which my original patch was based on (and I had actually 
fixed that typo too!) but I clearly messed something up when I rebased on the 
latest** master.
{quote}Can you please update your patch for master?  This file was recently 
split in two.
{quote}
**Obviously not latest enough.

Sorry about that. [~tomasflobbe] actually mentioned to me a couple days ago 
that the files had changed but I didn't get a chance to fix it yet. Will upload 
a new patch later today.

> Support missing versionField on indexed docs in DocBasedVersionConstraintsURP
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-12378
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12378
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>      Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) 
>          Components: UpdateRequestProcessors
>    Affects Versions: master (8.0)
>            Reporter: Oliver Bates
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: features, patch
>         Attachments: supportMissingVersionOnOldDocs-v1.patch
>
>
> -If we want to start using DocBasedVersionConstraintsUpdateRequestProcessor 
> on an existing index, we have to reindex everything to set value for the 
> 'versionField' field, otherwise- We can't start using 
> DocBasedVersionConstraintsUpdateRequestProcessor on an existing index because 
> we get this line throwing shade:
> {code:java}
> throw new SolrException(SERVER_ERROR,
>         "Doc exists in index, but has null versionField: "
>                 + versionFieldName);
> {code}
> We have to reindex everything into a new collection, which isn't always 
> practical/possible. The proposal here is to have an option to allow the 
> existing docs to be missing this field and to simply treat those docs as 
> older than anything coming in with that field set.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to