[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8276?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15005302#comment-15005302
]
Ishan Chattopadhyaya edited comment on SOLR-8276 at 11/14/15 10:24 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was kind of hoping not to redo all the low level conversions like
{{Float.intBitsToFloat((int)arr.get(doc))}} (this example from
{{FloatFieldSource}}) all over again and hence was hoping to use the functions
and get away without doing it. However, since multivalued docValues aren't
accessible that way, I have three choices:
# Do the single valued fields using the function queries and the multivalued
fields using the docValues API (will also require this low level conversions
for non long docvalues). Or,
# Do both singly and multi valued fields using docValues API and do the low
level conversions for both. Or,
# Do single valued fields using function queries, and extend functions queries
to support multivalued docvalues and use it.
[~ysee...@gmail.com] Any preference? Right now, I'm thinking of going with 1
now, and when/if function queries can be made to support multivalued fields
later, then switch to 3. Does that sound good? (I am fine going option 2 route
as well). Also, are there any performance implications I am overlooking when
using value sources as opposed to docvalues API directly?
was (Author: ichattopadhyaya):
I was kind of hoping not to redo all the low level conversions like
{{Float.intBitsToFloat((int)arr.get(doc))}} (this example from
{{FloatFieldSource}} all over again and hence hoping to use the functions and
get away with it. However, since multivalued docValues aren't accessible that
way, I have three choices:
# Do the single valued fields using the function queries and the multivalued
fields using the docValues API (will also require this low level conversions
for non long docvalues). Or,
# Do both singly and multi valued fields using docValues API and do the low
level conversions for both. Or,
# Do single valued fields using function queries, and extend functions queries
to support multivalued docvalues and use it.
[~ysee...@gmail.com] Any preference? Right now, I'm thinking of going with 1
now, and when/if function queries can be made to support multivalued fields
later, then switch to 3. Does that sound good? (I am fine going option 2 route
as well).
> Atomic updates & RTG don't work with non-stored docvalues
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-8276
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8276
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Ishan Chattopadhyaya
> Attachments: SOLR-8276.patch, SOLR-8276.patch
>
>
> Currently, for atomic updates, the non-stored docvalues fields are neither
> (a) carried forward to updated document, nor (b) do operations like "inc"
> work on them. Also, RTG of documents containing such fields doesn't return
> those fields if the document is fetched from the index.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
