I think there no particular demand... But: why not just separately delete by query, then add?
Back when IW had autoCommit=true, it was compelling to have an atomic update, but now with only autoCommit=false, the app has full control over visibility to readers, so do we even need update-by-term anymore? Mike On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 2:13 PM, Sanne Grinovero <sanne.grinov...@gmail.com> wrote: > If the demand is the problem: > I would really love that: in most scenarios a single term is not > enough to identify a Document: I need at least two so I use usually > remove-by-query first and then add again. > This sometimes needs some application level lock to make the changes > consistent. > > Sanne > > 2010/1/10 Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com>: >> Any reason we don't offer update doc by query along with term? >> >> Its easy enough to implement in the same manner - is there some sort of >> gotchya with this, or is it just because there has been no demand yet? >> >> -- >> - Mark >> >> http://www.lucidimagination.com >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
