It is a distributed search! So where in the code is the de-dup happening for distributed searches? And is it correct that this is new in 4.4.0 (vs 4.0.0)? Or did I just accidently change my config to turn it on.

Regards, Per Steffensen

On 10/18/13 10:09 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
AFAIK, the only dedup that is done on purpose is during distributed search.
So either a distributed search is happening, or there has been some
other change that accidentally started de-duping (such as some sort of
map from ID to Doc for other reasons).

-Yonik


On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Per Steffensen <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi

I send update/add-requests to Solr in a way so that indexWriter.addDocument
is used in DirectUpdateHandler2 instead of indexWriter.updateDocument. In
two separate requests I send two identical documents into Solr. In Solr
4.0.0 I get both documents back when I search. In Solr 4.4.0 I only get one
document back. I have investigated a little into what happens in Solr 4.4.0,
and I believe I see that both documents actually in the Lucene indices (in
QueryComponent.process the searcher.search line returns two docs for one of
my shards). So it must be somewhere in the search-flow that it is decided to
send only one of them back to the client. In Solr 4.0.0 I get both back to
the client.

Is this known/intended behavior? Can someone point me to the code where
"duplicates" are filtered, and/or to the JIRA issue where this feature was
introduced. Not that I necessarily want to do it, but can this searh-dedup
be turned off?

Regards, Per Steffensen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to