OK, I was just reviewing some of the router code changes (better late
than never...)
ImplicitDocIdRouter has this:
if(shard == null) shard =params.get("_shard_"); //deperecated
for back compat
Also, it looks like route.field can be specified for the compositeId
rotuer as well.
I'll update that page.
-Yonik
http://lucidworks.com
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Cassandra Targett
<casstarg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I notice that Noble updated the Collections API page with the
> information that was needed - thank you.
>
> Based on that, I updated this page:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Shards+and+Indexing+Data+in+SolrCloud
>
> Yonik or Noble, if you one of you would look the section on Document
> Routing over, I would appreciate it. I adapted the content that was
> there to fit these new options, but am not entirely sure I have it
> right.
>
> Thanks,
> Cassandra
>
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Chris Hostetter
> <hossman_luc...@fucit.org> wrote:
>>
>> Yonik / Noble / Shalin in particular:
>>
>> we need clarification here on these changes for 4.5...
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4221?focusedCommentId=13769675&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13769675
>>
>>
>> Cassandra and i were talking on IRC this morning about the satate of the ref
>> guide -- our opinion is that in terms of changes for 4.5, things look pretty
>> good and we could probably go ahead and do an RC in parallel ith the code
>> RC1 that Adrien is currently re-spinning (which might even allow us to
>> release/announce the ref guide in the same email as the code release itself)
>>
>> But the one blocker is this change discussed at the end of SOLR-4221
>> regarding teh "routeField" param.
>>
>> Noble previously updated the ref guide documentation to include
>> routerField...
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Collections+API
>>
>> ...but it's not currently clear to cassandra or myself if that documentation
>> is still accurate -- should the refrences to "routeField" be replaced by
>> "router.field" ? does hte documentation need to generally be improved to
>> refer to supporting a generic set of "router.*" params that are user
>> defined?
>>
>> throw us a bone here guys. Docs on new features are probably the most
>> important part of the user guide updates, and inaccurate docs on new
>> features is worse then no doc at all.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Hoss
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
