This is a really cool feature!
Thanks for pointing us in that direction!

As the "Quick Start" says, a document does not need a commit nor a
soft-commit or anything else to be available via RealTimeGet.

However, regarding a versioning-system, one always has to keep in mind
that an uncommited document is not guaranteed to be persisted in the index.
So if you give a Duplicate-Key-Error, because there is a pending
document with that key and afterwards the server goes down for any
reason, you might end up without that document inside of Solr.
You need a log for failover.

Kind regards,
Em

Am 24.02.2012 11:06, schrieb Per Steffensen:
> Sami Siren skrev:
>>>> Given that you've set a uniqueKey-field and there already exists a
>>>> document with that uniqueKey, it will delete the old one and insert the
>>>> new one. There is really no difference between the semantics - updates
>>>> do not exist.
>>>> To create a UNIQUE-constraint as you know it from a database you
>>>> have to
>>>> check whether a document is already in the index *or* whether it is
>>>> already pending (waiting for getting flushed to the index).
>>>> Fortunately Solr manages a so called pending-set with all those
>>>> documents waiting for beeing flushed to disk (Solr 3.5).
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> We are using latest greates 4.0-SNAPSHOT code, because we want to take
>>> advantage of SolrCloud stuff. Can you give a code-pointer to where I can
>>> find the pending-set stuff?
>>>     
>>
>> I am not sure if this is what you're asking but you should be able to
>> get the latest data from Solr by using
>> realtime get http://wiki.apache.org/solr/RealTimeGet
>>   
> Thanks a lot! I might be very usefull, if this provide 100% real time
> get - that is, if it gets the latest version of the document, also when
> neither a soft-commit nor a hard-commit has been performed since the
> lastest version of the document was indexed. Does it do that, or does it
> need a soft commit (then I believe it is only a near real time get
> operation)?
>> -- 
>>  Sami Siren
>>
>>   
> 
> 

Reply via email to