Very helpful - thanks.  Right, I simplified the app code and fixed the conflict 
issue, but found 2 new bugs as a result - so this response below is actually 
super helpful.  Thanks again.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christopher Hamlin
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2015 8:41 AM
To: MarkLogic Developer Discussion
Subject: Re: [MarkLogic Dev General] xdmp:node-replace

Hi,

You can't make two changes to the same node, but somehow that is what is 
happening.  In this case you are making two changes to

fn:doc("/olympus/pacer-xml/1155991_2:13-cv-00188")/case/parties/party[1]/representedBy/counsel/firmname

The definition says:

====================
Cause

The application attempted to perform multiple updates to the same document 
within the same transaction.

A single statement may not perform more than one update to the same document. 
For example, you cannot update a node and add a child element to that node in 
the same statement.

Response

Revise your application code to perform the conflicting operations in two 
separate statements. For example, use the semicolon transaction delimiter, or 
execute the second update inside an xdmp:eval with the isolation option set to 
different-transaction.
====================

There is a bit more info here:

https://help.marklogic.com/knowledgebase/article/View/25/16/xdmp-conflictingupdates-and-how-to-avoid-it

Maybe use xdmp:log and instead of making the change, log the 
URIs/xpath/whatever.  Then you would see what's going on and whether it is what 
you expect.  You can use xdmp:describe to dump things out.
Note that it will truncate by default, but that can be overridden.

/ch
_______________________________________________
General mailing list
[email protected]
Manage your subscription at: 
http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general



_______________________________________________
General mailing list
[email protected]
Manage your subscription at: 
http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general

Reply via email to