[ 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.