You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@lucene.apache.org by "David Smiley (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2021/02/24 04:48:00 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (SOLR-15064) Atomic/partial updates to nested
docs should not assume _route_ param is the root ID
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15064?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17289656#comment-17289656 ]
David Smiley commented on SOLR-15064:
-------------------------------------
[~thomas.woeckinger], I'll respond to a comment you left on a linked issue that I think is meant to go here:
bq. Is there always a route parameter present? Especially when using prefix routing or implicit router with document
fields?
No; it's quite optional and most users I think don't know about it (for indexing) let alone use it. It's not added internally.
bq. But anyway, it would be great if the flag can be avoided at all. Just for understanding this means that RTG is not used if only a 'root' document is involved (having child documents is irrelevant)?
I don't know what you mean.
> Atomic/partial updates to nested docs should not assume _route_ param is the root ID
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-15064
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15064
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Environment: Updating to make a blocker for 9.0 because I _really_ want to remove the 9.0 hack RE {{\_route_}} param. I don't think I'll get around to updating the routing logic to look at a {{\_root_}} field, and it's nice knowing we have a work-around By using the {{/32!}} separator. Another work-around would be using {{router.field=\_root_}} if you _always_ pass in this field.
> Reporter: David Smiley
> Assignee: David Smiley
> Priority: Blocker
> Labels: NestedDocuments
> Fix For: master (9.0)
>
>
> In SOLR-14923, doing an atomic/partial update to a child doc requires indicating what the root doc ID is. Formerly Solr tried to figure this out automatically, but that had costly implications. SOLR-14923 adds a temporary hack that assumes that the \_route_ paramter *is* the root ID, if the \_root_ field is not on the doc. But that's not necessarily accurate, so it should be removed.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: [jira] [Commented] (SOLR-15064) Atomic/partial updates to nested
docs should not assume _route_ param is the root ID
Posted by Thomas Wöckinger <th...@gmail.com>.
I am not sure how this happened, it was a comment form another thread,
whatever i deleted it
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 5:48 AM David Smiley (Jira) <ji...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15064?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17289656#comment-17289656
> ]
>
> David Smiley commented on SOLR-15064:
> -------------------------------------
>
> [~thomas.woeckinger], I'll respond to a comment you left on a linked issue
> that I think is meant to go here:
>
> bq. Is there always a route parameter present? Especially when using
> prefix routing or implicit router with document
> fields?
>
> No; it's quite optional and most users I think don't know about it (for
> indexing) let alone use it. It's not added internally.
>
> bq. But anyway, it would be great if the flag can be avoided at all. Just
> for understanding this means that RTG is not used if only a 'root' document
> is involved (having child documents is irrelevant)?
>
> I don't know what you mean.
>
>
>
>
> > Atomic/partial updates to nested docs should not assume _route_ param is
> the root ID
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Key: SOLR-15064
> > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15064
> > Project: Solr
> > Issue Type: Improvement
> > Environment: Updating to make a blocker for 9.0 because I
> _really_ want to remove the 9.0 hack RE {{\_route_}} param. I don't think
> I'll get around to updating the routing logic to look at a {{\_root_}}
> field, and it's nice knowing we have a work-around By using the {{/32!}}
> separator. Another work-around would be using {{router.field=\_root_}} if
> you _always_ pass in this field.
> > Reporter: David Smiley
> > Assignee: David Smiley
> > Priority: Blocker
> > Labels: NestedDocuments
> > Fix For: master (9.0)
> >
> >
> > In SOLR-14923, doing an atomic/partial update to a child doc requires
> indicating what the root doc ID is. Formerly Solr tried to figure this out
> automatically, but that had costly implications. SOLR-14923 adds a
> temporary hack that assumes that the \_route_ paramter *is* the root ID, if
> the \_root_ field is not on the doc. But that's not necessarily accurate,
> so it should be removed.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
> (v8.3.4#803005)
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>