> > Interestingly, I was forced to add children as an array even when the > child was alone and the field was already marked multivalued. It seems > the code does not do conversation to multi-value type, which means the > query code has to be a lot more careful about checking field return > type and having multi-path handling. That's not what Solr does for > string class (tested). Is that a known issue? > > https://github.com/arafalov/SolrJTest/blob/master/src/com/solrstart/solrj/Main.java#L88-L89
Not sure about this. Maybe we might need to check in Dev list or Slack If I switch commented/uncommented lines around, the retrieval will fail > part way through, because one 'children' field is returned as array, but > not the other one: This might be because of these checks https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/e1392c74400d74366982ccb796063ffdcef08047/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/response/transform/ChildDocTransformer.java#L201-L209 but not sure Regards, Munendra S N On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 7:53 PM Alexandre Rafalovitch <arafa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you Nunedra, > > That was very helpful. I am looking forward to that documentation Jira > to be merged into the next release. > > I was able to get the example working by switching away from anonymous > children to the field approach. Which means hasChildren() call also > did not work. It seems the addChildren/hasChildren will need a > different schema, without _nest_path_ defined. I did not test. > > Interestingly, I was forced to add children as an array even when the > child was alone and the field was already marked multivalued. It seems > the code does not do conversation to multi-value type, which means the > query code has to be a lot more careful about checking field return > type and having multi-path handling. That's not what Solr does for > string class (tested). Is that a known issue? > > https://github.com/arafalov/SolrJTest/blob/master/src/com/solrstart/solrj/Main.java#L88-L89 > > If I switch commented/uncommented lines around, the retrieval will > fail part way through, because one 'children' field is returned as > array, but not the other one: > > {responseHeader={status=0,QTime=0,params={q=id:p1,fl=*,[child],wt=javabin,version=2}},response={numFound=1,numFoundExact=true,start=0,docs=[SolrDocument{id=p1, > name=[parent1], class=[foo.bar.parent1.1, foo.bar.parent1.2], > _version_=1675826293154775040, children=[SolrDocument{id=c1, > name=[child1], class=[foo.bar.child1], _version_=1675826293154775040, > children=SolrDocument{id=gc1, name=[grandChild1], > class=[foo.bar.grandchild1], _version_=1675826293154775040}}, > SolrDocument{id=c2, name=[child2], class=[foo.bar.child2], > _version_=1675826293154775040}]}]}} > > Regards, > Alex. > > On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 01:38, Munendra S N <sn.munendr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > Currently, Fixing the documentation for nested docs is under progress. > More > > context is available in this JIRA - > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14383. > > > > > https://github.com/arafalov/SolrJTest/blob/master/src/com/solrstart/solrj/Main.java > > > > The child doc transformer needs to be specified as part of the fl > parameter > > like fl=*,[child] so that the descendants are returned for each matching > > doc. As the query q=* matches all the documents, they are returned. If > only > > parent doc needs to be returned with descendants then, we should either > use > > block join query or query clause which matches only parent doc. > > > > Another thing I noticed in the code is that the child docs are indexed as > > anonymous docs (similar to old syntax) instead of indexing them in the > new > > syntax. With this, the nested block will be indexed but since the schema > > has _nested_path_ defined [child] doc transformer won't return any docs. > > Anonymous child docs need parentFilter but specifying parentFilter with > > _nested_path_ will lead to error > > It is due to this check - > > > https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/1c8f4c988a07b08f83d85e27e59b43eed5e2ca2a/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/response/transform/ChildDocTransformerFactory.java#L104 > > > > Instead of indexing the docs this way, > > > > > SolrInputDocument parent1 = new SolrInputDocument(); > > > parent1.addField("id", "p1"); > > > parent1.addField("name", "parent1"); > > > parent1.addField("class", "foo.bar.parent1"); > > > > > > SolrInputDocument child1 = new SolrInputDocument(); > > > > > > parent1.addChildDocument(child1); > > > child1.addField("id", "c1"); > > > child1.addField("name", "child1"); > > > child1.addField("class", "foo.bar.child1"); > > > > > > > > modify it to indexing > > > > > SolrInputDocument parent1 = new SolrInputDocument(); > > > parent1.addField("id", "p1"); > > > parent1.addField("name", "parent1"); > > > parent1.addField("class", "foo.bar.parent1"); > > > > > > SolrInputDocument child1 = new SolrInputDocument(); > > > > > > parent1.addField("sometag", Arrays.asList(child1)); > > > child1.addField("id", "c1"); > > > child1.addField("name", "child1"); > > > child1.addField("class", "foo.bar.child1"); > > > > > > I think, once the documentation fixes get merged to master, indexing > and > > searching with the nested documents will become much clearer. > > > > Regards, > > Munendra S N > > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 5:18 AM Alexandre Rafalovitch < > arafa...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I am trying to get up to date with both SolrJ and Nested Document > > > implementation and not sure where I am failing with a basic test > > > ( > > > > https://github.com/arafalov/SolrJTest/blob/master/src/com/solrstart/solrj/Main.java > > > ). > > > > > > I am using Solr 8.6.1 with a core created with bin/solr create -c > > > solrj (schemaless is still on). > > > > > > I then index a nested parent/child/grandchild document in and then > > > query it back. Looking at debug it seems to go out fine as a nested > > > doc but come back as a 3 individual ones. > > > > > > Output is: > > > SolrInputDocument(fields: [id=p1, name=parent1, > > > class=foo.bar.parent1], children: [SolrInputDocument(fields: [id=c1, > > > name=child1, class=foo.bar.child1], children: > > > [SolrInputDocument(fields: [id=gc1, name=grandChild1, > > > class=foo.bar.grandchild1])])]) > > > > > > > {responseHeader={status=0,QTime=1,params={q=*,wt=javabin,version=2}},response={numFound=3,numFoundExact=true,start=0,docs=[SolrDocument{id=gc1, > > > name=[grandChild1], class=[foo.bar.grandchild1], > > > _version_=1675769219435724800}, SolrDocument{id=c1, name=[child1], > > > class=[foo.bar.child1], _version_=1675769219435724800}, > > > SolrDocument{id=p1, name=[parent1], class=[foo.bar.parent1], > > > _version_=1675769219435724800}]}} > > > Found 3 documents > > > > > > Field: 'id' => 'gc1' > > > Field: 'name' => '[grandChild1]' > > > Field: 'class' => '[foo.bar.grandchild1]' > > > Field: '_version_' => '1675769219435724800' > > > Children: false > > > > > > Field: 'id' => 'c1' > > > Field: 'name' => '[child1]' > > > Field: 'class' => '[foo.bar.child1]' > > > Field: '_version_' => '1675769219435724800' > > > Children: false > > > > > > Field: 'id' => 'p1' > > > Field: 'name' => '[parent1]' > > > Field: 'class' => '[foo.bar.parent1]' > > > Field: '_version_' => '1675769219435724800' > > > Children: false > > > > > > Looking in Admin UI: > > > * _root_ element is there and has 3 instances of 'p1' value > > > * _nest_path_ (of type _nest_path_ !?!) is also there but is not > populated > > > * _nest_parent_ is not there > > > > > > I am not quite sure what that means and what other scheme modification > > > (to the _default_) I need to do to get it to work. > > > > > > I also tried to reproduce the example in the documentation (e.g. > > > > https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_6/indexing-nested-documents.html > > > and > > > > https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_6/searching-nested-documents.html#searching-nested-documents > > > ) > > > but both seem to also want some undiscussed schema (e.g. with ID field > > > instead of id) and fail to execute against default schema. > > > > > > I am kind of stuck. Anybody has a working SolrJ/Nested example or > > > ideas of what I missed. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Alex. > > > >
