Re: Atomic Update w/ Date Copy Field

[Todd Long <lo...@gmail.com>]

Stefan Matheis-3 wrote
> To me, it sounds more like you shouldn’t have to care about such gory
> details as a user - at all.
> 
> would you mind opening a issue on JIRA Todd? Including all the details you
> already provided in as well as a link to this thread, would be best.
> 
> Depending on what you actually did to find this all out, you probably do
> even have a test case at hand which demonstrates the behaviour? if not,
> that’s obviously not a problem :)

Agreed on the gory details. Yes, it definitely seems like the format should
be consistent between full and partial updates. I'll go ahead and open an
issue on JIRA.


Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote
> I noticed (and abused) the issue Todd described in my Solr puzzle at:
> http://blog.outerthoughts.com/2016/04/solr-5-puzzle-magic-date-answer/
> 
> The second format ("EEE...") looks rather strange. I would suspect
> that the conversion Date->String code is using the active locale and
> that is the format default for that locale. So, the bug might be that
> the locale needs to be more specific to preserve the consistence.

Thank you for the Solr puzzle reference. The EEE format is most certainly
the java.util.Date.toString() method being called when re-creating the
field.



--
View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Atomic-Update-w-Date-Copy-Field-tp4293779p4295049.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.