[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5211?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16685206#comment-16685206
]
David Smiley commented on SOLR-5211:
------------------------------------
The absence of _root_ on a non-nested doc has been a problem while working on
SOLR-12638. I think we should just add it, as Oleg proposes for 8.0. Sure; it'd
be nice to not pay this cost for users that don't need nested docs (and most
don't need it by far). They can simply omit _root_ though, as well as other
special nested fields that will appear in 8.0. 8.0 will add _nest_parent_ and
_nest_path_ to the default schema. Perhaps 8.0 should include a rename of
_root_ to be _nest_root_ which'll be always populated and we leave out _root_;
but an "old" schema with _root_ should work as it does today (e.g. the schema
_either_ has _root_ (old) or _nest_root_ (new) or neither). CC [~moshebla]
> updating parent as childless makes old children orphans
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-5211
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5211
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: update
> Affects Versions: 4.5, 6.0
> Reporter: Mikhail Khludnev
> Assignee: Mikhail Khludnev
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: SOLR-5211.patch, SOLR-5211.patch, SOLR-5211.patch
>
>
> if I have parent with children in the index, I can send update omitting
> children. as a result old children become orphaned.
> I suppose separate \_root_ fields makes much trouble. I propose to extend
> notion of uniqueKey, and let it spans across blocks that makes updates
> unambiguous.
> WDYT? Do you like to see a test proves this issue?
--
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
