lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sergio García Maroto <marot...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: _version_ / Versioning using timespan
Date Fri, 02 Jun 2017 14:01:00 GMT
You are right about that but in some cases I may need to reindex my data
and wanted to avoid deleting the full index so
I can still server queries. I thought reindexing same version would be
handy or at least to have the flexibility.

On 2 June 2017 at 14:53, Susheel Kumar <susheel2777@gmail.com> wrote:

> I see the difference now between using _version_ vs custom versionField.
> Both seems to behave differently.  The _version_ field if used allows same
> version to be updated and that's the perception I had in mind for custom
> versionField.
>
> My question is why do you want to update the document if same version.
> Shouldn't you pass higher version if the doc has changed and that makes the
> update to be accepted ?
>
> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Susheel Kumar <susheel2777@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Just to confirm again before go too far,  are you able to execute these
> > examples and see same output given under "Optimistic Concurrency".
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/
> > Updating+Parts+of+Documents#UpdatingPartsofDocuments-In-PlaceUpdates
> >
> > Let me know which example you fail to get same output as described in.
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Sergio García Maroto <marotosg@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I had a look to the source code and I see
> >> DocBasedVersionConstraintsProcessorFactory
> >>
> >> if (0 < ((Comparable)newUserVersion).compareTo((Comparable)
> >> oldUserVersion)) {
> >>           // log.info("VERSION returning true (proceed with update)" );
> >>           return true;
> >> }
> >>
> >> I can't find a way of overwriting same version without changing that
> piece
> >> of code.
> >> Would be possible to add a parameter to the
> >> "DocBasedVersionConstraintsProcessorFactory" something like
> >> "overwrite.same.version=true"
> >> so the new code would look like.
> >>
> >>
> >> int compareTo = ((Comparable)newUserVersion).compareTo((Comparable)
> >> oldUserVersion);
> >> if ( ((overwritesameversion) && 0 <= compareTo) || (0 < compareTo))
{
> >>           // log.info("VERSION returning true (proceed with update)" );
> >>           return true;
> >> }
> >>
> >>
> >> Is that thing going to break anyhting? Can i do that change?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Sergio
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2 June 2017 at 10:10, Sergio García Maroto <marotosg@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I am using  6.1.0.
> >> > I tried with two different  field types, long and date.
> >> > <field name="versionEpoch"  type="long" indexed="true" stored="true"
> />
> >> > <field name="UpdatedDateSD"  type="date" indexed="true"
> stored="true"/>
> >> >
> >> > I am using this configuration on the solrconfig.xml
> >> >
> >> > <updateRequestProcessorChain default="true">
> >> >        <processor class="solr.DocBasedVersionCon
> >> straintsProcessorFactory">
> >> >          <bool name="ignoreOldUpdates">false</bool>
> >> >          <str name="versionField">UpdatedDateSD</str>
> >> >        </processor>
> >> >   <processor class="solr.DistributedUpdateProcessorFactory" />
> >> >        <processor class="solr.RunUpdateProcessorFactory" />
> >> >   <processor class="solr.LogUpdateProcessorFactory"/>
> >> >   </updateRequestProcessorChain>
> >> >
> >> > i had a look to the wiki page and it says https://cwiki.apache.org/
> >> > confluence/display/solr/Updating+Parts+of+Documents
> >> >
> >> > *Once configured, this update processor will reject (HTTP error code
> >> 409)
> >> > any attempt to update an existing document where the value of
> >> > the my_version_l field in the "new" document is not greater then the
> >> value
> >> > of that field in the existing document.*
> >> >
> >> > Do you have any tip on how to get same versions not getting rejected.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks a lot.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 1 June 2017 at 19:04, Susheel Kumar <susheel2777@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Which version of solr are you using? I tested in 6.0 and if I supply
> >> same
> >> >> version, it overwrite/update the document exactly as per the wiki
> >> >> documentation.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Susheel
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 7:57 AM, marotosg <marotosg@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Thanks a lot Susheel.
> >> >> > I see this is actually what I need.  I have been testing it and
> >> notice
> >> >> the
> >> >> > value of the field has to be always greater for a new document
to
> get
> >> >> > indexed. if you send the same version number it doesn't work.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Is it possible somehow to overwrite documents with the same
> version?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thanks
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.
> >> >> > nabble.com/version-Versioning-using-timespan-
> tp4338171p4338475.html
> >> >> > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message