lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Shawn Heisey (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (SOLR-6003) JSON Update increment field with non-stored fields causes subtle problems
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2014 22:43:18 GMT


Shawn Heisey commented on SOLR-6003:

"I thought of it later" followup: Instead of a flag, put a Collection<String> field
(which we might want to explicitly declare as a Set) in the schema object that contains all
the field names that must be present in an atomic update request to avoid data loss.  Log
a warning if any of those fields are missing from an atomic update.

> JSON Update increment field with non-stored fields causes subtle problems
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: SOLR-6003
>                 URL:
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: update
>    Affects Versions: 4.7.1
>            Reporter: Kingston Duffie
> In our application we have large multi-field documents.  We occasionally need to increment
one of the numeric fields or add a value to a multi-value text field.  This appears to work
correctly using JSON update.  But later we discovered that documents were disappearing from
search results and eventually found the documentation that indicates that to use field modification
you must store all fields of the document.
> Perhaps you will argue that you need to impose this restriction -- which I would hope
could be overcome because of the cost of us having to store all fields.  But in any case,
it would be better for others if you could return an error if someone tries to update a field
on documents with non-stored fields.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message