Re: How to specify custom update chain in a SolrJ request
Answering myself, the solution is to update my code as follows:
UpdateRequest request = new UpdateRequest();
request.setParam("update.chain", "skipexisting");
for (Map.Entry user : users.entrySet()) {
SolrInputDocument document = new SolrInputDocument();
document.addField("id", user.key().toString());
document.addField("applications", Collections.singletonMap("set",
user.value()));
request.add(document);
request.process(solrClient);
}
solrClient.commit();
On 29/01/2019 16:27, Chris Wareham wrote:
I'm trying to update records in my Solr core, and have configured a
custom update chain that skips updates to records that don't exist:
true
true
My SolrJ update code is currently:
for (Map.Entry user : users.entrySet()) {
SolrInputDocument document = new SolrInputDocument();
document.addField("id", user.key().toString());
document.addField("applications", Collections.singletonMap("set",
user.value()));
solrClient.add(document);
}
solrClient.commit();
I can't seem to specify the update chain to use and I assume I need to
use the UpdateRequest class. However, it's not clear how I go about
setting a parameter on the UpdateRequest in order to specify the update
chain.
Chris
How to specify custom update chain in a SolrJ request
I'm trying to update records in my Solr core, and have configured a
custom update chain that skips updates to records that don't exist:
true
true
My SolrJ update code is currently:
for (Map.Entry user : users.entrySet()) {
SolrInputDocument document = new SolrInputDocument();
document.addField("id", user.key().toString());
document.addField("applications", Collections.singletonMap("set",
user.value()));
solrClient.add(document);
}
solrClient.commit();
I can't seem to specify the update chain to use and I assume I need to
use the UpdateRequest class. However, it's not clear how I go about
setting a parameter on the UpdateRequest in order to specify the update
chain.
Chris
Re: PatternReplaceFilterFactory problem
Thanks for the help - changing the field type of the destination for the copy fields to "text_en" solved the problem. I'd foolishly assumed that the analysis of the source fields was applied then the resulting tokens passed to the copy field, which doesn't really make sense now that I think about it! So the indexing process is: +---+ ++ +-+ |companyName| | companyName | | companyName | |input data |>|text_en analysis|>|index| +---+ ++ +-+ | | ++ +-+ +-->| text |>|text | |text_en analysis| |index| ++ +-+ Rather than: +---+ ++ +-+ |companyName| | companyName | | companyName | |input data |>|text_en analysis|-->|index| +---+ ++ +-+ | +-+ +-+ | text|>|text | |text_general analysis| |index| +-+ +-+ On 28/01/2019 12:37, Scott Stults wrote: Hi Chris, You've included the field definition of type text_en, but in your queries you're searching the field "text", which is of type text_general. That may be the source of your problem, but if looking into that doesn't help send the definition of text_general as well. Hope that helps! -Scott On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 6:02 AM Chris Wareham < chris.ware...@graduate-jobs.com> wrote: I'm trying to index some data which often includes domain names. I'd like to remove the .com TLD, so I have modified the text_en field type by adding a PatternReplaceFilterFactory filter. However, it doesn't appear to be working as a search for "text:(mydomain.com)" matches records but "text:(mydomain)" does not. The actual field definitions are as follows:
PatternReplaceFilterFactory problem
I'm trying to index some data which often includes domain names. I'd like to remove the .com TLD, so I have modified the text_en field type by adding a PatternReplaceFilterFactory filter. However, it doesn't appear to be working as a search for "text:(mydomain.com)" matches records but "text:(mydomain)" does not. positionIncrementGap="100"> ignoreCase="true" synonyms="synonyms.txt"/> ignoreCase="true"/> pattern="([-a-z])\.com" replacement="$1"/> protected="protwords.txt"/> ignoreCase="true" synonyms="synonyms.txt"/> ignoreCase="true"/> pattern="([-a-z])\.com" replacement="$1"/> protected="protwords.txt"/> The actual field definitions are as follows: stored="true" required="true" /> stored="true" required="true" /> stored="false" />
Re: indexed and stored for fields that are sources of a copy field
Hi Emir, Many thanks for the confirmation. I'd kind of inferred this was correct from the paragraph starting with "Copying is done at the stream source level", but it would be good to mention it in the "Copying Fields" section of the Solr documentation. Should I create a JIRA issue asking for this? Regards, Chris On 22/10/2018 14:28, Emir Arnautović wrote: Hi Chris, Yes you can do that. There is also type=“ignored” that you can use in such scenario. HTH, Emir -- Monitoring - Log Management - Alerting - Anomaly Detection Solr & Elasticsearch Consulting Support Training - http://sematext.com/ On 22 Oct 2018, at 15:22, Chris Wareham wrote: Hi folks, I have a number of fields defined in my managed-schema file that are used as the sources for a copy field: Can I set both the indexed and stored values to false for the body, sectors and locations fields since I don't want to search or retrieve them? Regards, Chris
indexed and stored for fields that are sources of a copy field
Hi folks, I have a number of fields defined in my managed-schema file that are used as the sources for a copy field: stored="true"/> stored="true" multiValued="true"/> stored="true" multiValued="true"/> stored="false" multiValued="true"/> Can I set both the indexed and stored values to false for the body, sectors and locations fields since I don't want to search or retrieve them? Regards, Chris
