[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-139?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12521900
]
Erik Hatcher commented on SOLR-139:
-----------------------------------
One thing to note about overwrite and copyFields is that to keep a purely
copyFielded field in sync you must basically remove it (overwrite without
providing a value).
For example, my schema:
<dynamicField name="*_tag" type="string" indexed="true" stored="true"
multiValued="true"/>
<field name="tag" type="string" indexed="true" stored="true"
multiValued="true"/>
and then this:
<copyField source="*_tag" dest="tag"/>
The client never provides a value for "tag" only ever <username>_tag values.
I was seeing old values in the tag field after doing overwrites of
<username>_tag expecting "tag" to get rewritten entirely. Saying
mode=tag:OVERWRITE does the trick. This is understandable, but confusing, as
the client then needs to know about purely copyFielded fields that it never
sends directly.
> Support updateable/modifiable documents
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-139
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-139
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: update
> Reporter: Ryan McKinley
> Assignee: Ryan McKinley
> Attachments: getStoredFields.patch, getStoredFields.patch,
> getStoredFields.patch, getStoredFields.patch, getStoredFields.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-ModifyInputDocuments.patch,
> SOLR-139-ModifyInputDocuments.patch, SOLR-139-ModifyInputDocuments.patch,
> SOLR-139-ModifyInputDocuments.patch, SOLR-139-XmlUpdater.patch,
> SOLR-269+139-ModifiableDocumentUpdateProcessor.patch
>
>
> It would be nice to be able to update some fields on a document without
> having to insert the entire document.
> Given the way lucene is structured, (for now) one can only modify stored
> fields.
> While we are at it, we can support incrementing an existing value - I think
> this only makes sense for numbers.
> for background, see:
> http://www.nabble.com/loading-many-documents-by-ID-tf3145666.html#a8722293
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
