[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUTCH-2456?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16244761#comment-16244761
 ] 

Markus Jelsma commented on NUTCH-2456:
--------------------------------------

What will this patch achieve then? Just the case of ignoring dbDatum i presume? 
If have a hard time reading githubs output here, my problem.

How about index.*.md? What will happen if someone has both index.parse.md and 
index.db.md enabled? Will it end up with duplicates, fields not configured to 
be multivalued? If so, that would need a new issue for that.

The problem of duplicates and orphans is obvious. But that can be remedied by 
never having those eligible for fetch via a custom (or built-in) FetchSchedule.

To be clear, i am really for having this feature as it will reduce cycle time 
by a lot for large CrawlDBs, especially if you start indexing in parallel when 
updatedb is due.



> Allow to index pages/URLs not contained in CrawlDb
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: NUTCH-2456
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUTCH-2456
>             Project: Nutch
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: indexer
>    Affects Versions: 1.13
>            Reporter: Yossi Tamari
>            Priority: Critical
>
> If http.redirect.max is set to a positive value, the Fetcher will follow 
> redirects, creating a new CrawlDatum.
> If the redirected URL is fetched and parsed, during indexing for it we have a 
> special case: dbDatum is null. This means that in 
> [https://github.com/apache/nutch/blob/6199492f5e1e8811022257c88dbf63f1e1c739d0/src/java/org/apache/nutch/indexer/IndexerMapReduce.java#L259]
>  the document is not indexed, as it is assumed it only has inlinks (actually 
> it has everything but dbDatum).
> I'm not sure what the correct fix is here. It seems to me the condition 
> should use AND instead of OR anyway, but I may not understand the original 
> intent. It is clear that it is too strict as is.
> However, the code following that line assumes all 4 objects are not null, so 
> a patch would need to change more than just the condition.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to