> : If the user is savvy enough to 'rebuild' their documents from an > : external source, then the fields do not need to be stored (just the > : OID field for convenience). > > it's this rebuilding that people tend to dislike about the delete/re-add > process that's currently neccessary to "update" a document in Lucene .. > people don't wnat to have to be savvy enough to rebuild their documents > from an external source, they want to throw a bunch of docs in, do some > searches, pull a doc out, modify one field and throw it back in again. > > at least: that's how i would characterize most questions about "updating" > docs. > > if the issue was just one of supporting an updateDoc(Document) method > where the client is expected to "rebuild" the entire doc before calling the > method, then we've already got that ... it's > IndexWriter.updateDocument(Term,Document).
Perhaps the method name "IndexWriter.updateDocument()" is misleading and should be "replaceDocument()" - b/c this is actually what happens - an old document is being replaced by a new one. Won't help those wanting to really update part of an existing document, but might at least set expectations right and reduce some confusion. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
