Well, "it depends". The Atomic update has to first go out to disk and
decompress the original stored fields in 16K blocks,
then overlay the atomic update on the uncompressed doc, then re-index
the doc. 40K times in your example.
So yes, the stream going to Solr will be smaller if you do atomic
> I am aware of the requirements to use atomic updates, but as I understood,
> those would not have a big impact on performance and only a slight increase
> in index size?
AFAIK there won't be a difference in index size between atomic updates
and full updates, as the end result is the same.
: partial update or a complete document. Under the hood a partial update
: is a complete object anyway. Using partial updates you gain a little
: bandwidth at the expense of additional stored fields.
FWIW: once SOLR-5944 lands in a released version, that won't always be
true -- atomic updates
mer <s.rie...@littera.eu>
> Sent: Wednesday 15th February 2017 19:31
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Atomic updates to increase single field bulk updates?
>
> Dear solr users,
>
> when updating documents in bulk (i.e. 40.000 documents at once), and only
&g
Dear solr users,
when updating documents in bulk (i.e. 40.000 documents at once), and only
changing the value of a single Boolean-Flag, I currently re-index all whole
40.000 objects. However, the process of obtaining all relevant information for
each object from the database is one of
