[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-139?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12522333
]
Yonik Seeley commented on SOLR-139:
-----------------------------------
> how about using <update> instead of <add>
We had previously talked about making this distinction (and configuration for
each field) in the URL:
http://localhost:8983/solr/update?mode=title:overwrite,cat:distinct
This makes it usable and consistent for different update handlers and formats
(CSV, future SQL, future JSON, etc)
but perhaps if we allowed the <add> tag to optionally be called something more
neutral like <docs>?
wrt patches, I think the functionality needs refactoring so that modify
document logic is in the update handler. It seems like it's the only clean way
from a locking perspective, and it also leaves open future optimizations (like
using different indices depending on the fieldname and using a parallel reader
across them).
> 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.