[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-139?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12521928
]
Erik Hatcher commented on SOLR-139:
-----------------------------------
A mistake I had was my copyField target ("tag") was stored. Setting it to be
unstored alleviated the need to overwrite it - thanks!
One thing I noticed is that all fields sent in the update must be stored, but
that doesn't really need to be the case with fields being overwritten -
perhaps that restriction should be lifted and only applies when the stored data
is needed.
As for sending in a field that was the target of a copyField - I'm not doing
this nor can I really envision this case, but it seemed like it might be a case
to consider here. Perhaps a "text" field that could be optionally set by the
client, and is also the destination of copyField's of title, author, etc.
> Support updateable/modifiable documents
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-139
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-139
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: update
> Reporter: Ryan McKinley
> Assignee: Ryan McKinley
> Attachments: getStoredFields.patch, getStoredFields.patch,
> getStoredFields.patch, getStoredFields.patch, getStoredFields.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch,
> SOLR-139-IndexDocumentCommand.patch, SOLR-139-ModifyInputDocuments.patch,
> SOLR-139-ModifyInputDocuments.patch, SOLR-139-ModifyInputDocuments.patch,
> SOLR-139-ModifyInputDocuments.patch, SOLR-139-XmlUpdater.patch,
> SOLR-269+139-ModifiableDocumentUpdateProcessor.patch
>
>
> It would be nice to be able to update some fields on a document without
> having to insert the entire document.
> Given the way lucene is structured, (for now) one can only modify stored
> fields.
> While we are at it, we can support incrementing an existing value - I think
> this only makes sense for numbers.
> for background, see:
> http://www.nabble.com/loading-many-documents-by-ID-tf3145666.html#a8722293
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
