You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by "Ishan Chattopadhyaya (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2015/11/14 11:24:11 UTC
[jira] [Comment Edited] (SOLR-8276) Atomic updates & RTG don't work
with non-stored docvalues
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8276?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15005302#comment-15005302 ]
Ishan Chattopadhyaya edited comment on SOLR-8276 at 11/14/15 10:24 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was kind of hoping not to redo all the low level conversions like {{Float.intBitsToFloat((int)arr.get(doc))}} (this example from {{FloatFieldSource}}) all over again and hence was hoping to use the functions and get away without doing it. However, since multivalued docValues aren't accessible that way, I have three choices:
# Do the single valued fields using the function queries and the multivalued fields using the docValues API (will also require this low level conversions for non long docvalues). Or,
# Do both singly and multi valued fields using docValues API and do the low level conversions for both. Or,
# Do single valued fields using function queries, and extend functions queries to support multivalued docvalues and use it.
[~yseeley@gmail.com] Any preference? Right now, I'm thinking of going with 1 now, and when/if function queries can be made to support multivalued fields later, then switch to 3. Does that sound good? (I am fine going option 2 route as well). Also, are there any performance implications I am overlooking when using value sources as opposed to docvalues API directly?
was (Author: ichattopadhyaya):
I was kind of hoping not to redo all the low level conversions like {{Float.intBitsToFloat((int)arr.get(doc))}} (this example from {{FloatFieldSource}} all over again and hence hoping to use the functions and get away with it. However, since multivalued docValues aren't accessible that way, I have three choices:
# Do the single valued fields using the function queries and the multivalued fields using the docValues API (will also require this low level conversions for non long docvalues). Or,
# Do both singly and multi valued fields using docValues API and do the low level conversions for both. Or,
# Do single valued fields using function queries, and extend functions queries to support multivalued docvalues and use it.
[~yseeley@gmail.com] Any preference? Right now, I'm thinking of going with 1 now, and when/if function queries can be made to support multivalued fields later, then switch to 3. Does that sound good? (I am fine going option 2 route as well).
> Atomic updates & RTG don't work with non-stored docvalues
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-8276
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8276
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Ishan Chattopadhyaya
> Attachments: SOLR-8276.patch, SOLR-8276.patch
>
>
> Currently, for atomic updates, the non-stored docvalues fields are neither (a) carried forward to updated document, nor (b) do operations like "inc" work on them. Also, RTG of documents containing such fields doesn't return those fields if the document is fetched from the index.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org