lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alessandro Benedetti <benedetti.ale...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [ContentStreamUpdateRequest] POST Http Request header
Date Sat, 14 Dec 2013 12:35:31 GMT
I copy here this information as well.
Another detail that comes to my mind is that the SolrServer used to process
the request is *CloudSolrServer.*
I will check the implementation of the method.


2013/12/14 Alessandro Benedetti <benedetti.alex85@gmail.com>

> Thank you Raymond,
> so what's wrong in the code ?
> Who is responsible to decide if that params will go to the Header or in
> the body?
> Which is the "library I am using" you quoted ?
> I am using that objects from SolrJ API library.
>
>
> 2013/12/13 Raymond Wiker <rwiker@gmail.com>
>
>> I think you're wrong about this; both the "literal.*"parameters  and the
>> file will be sent as part of the body, as "multipart/form-data". It is
>> possible that whatever library you're using are placing the "literal.*"
>> parameters in the url, but that is by no means necessary (or even a good
>> idea).
>>
>> On 13 Dec 2013, at 11:46 , Alessandro Benedetti <
>> benedetti.alex85@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi guys,
>> > I was working with the ContentStreamUpdateRequest in solr 4.5 to send to
>> > Solr a document with a set of metaData through an HTTP POST request.
>> >
>> > Following the tutorial  is easy to structure the request :
>> >
>> > *contentStreamUpdateRequest.setParam("literal.field1","value1");*
>> >
>> > *contentStreamUpdateRequest.setParam("literal.field2","value2");*
>> > *...*
>> > *contentStreamUpdateRequest.addContentStream(new
>> > RepositoryDocumentStream(is,length,contentType,contentName));*
>> > *UpdateResponse response =
>> contentStreamUpdateRequest.process(solrServer);*
>> >
>> > The problem is that all the params we sets are going to fill the header
>> of
>> > the POST http request while only the content stream will be in the body.
>> > So, if we have a big load of metadata we risk to fill the Header and
>> make
>> > the application server to reject the packet.
>> >
>> > We can of course increase the HttpRequestHeader limit of the application
>> > container, but it's not what I want.
>> > Do you think is possible to send those parameters in the body of the
>> POST ?
>> >
>> > Thank you for your attention,
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > --------------------------
>> >
>> > Benedetti Alessandro
>> > Visiting card : http://about.me/alessandro_benedetti
>> >
>> > "Tyger, tyger burning bright
>> > In the forests of the night,
>> > What immortal hand or eye
>> > Could frame thy fearful symmetry?"
>> >
>> > William Blake - Songs of Experience -1794 England
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --------------------------
>
> Benedetti Alessandro
> Visiting card : http://about.me/alessandro_benedetti
>
> "Tyger, tyger burning bright
> In the forests of the night,
> What immortal hand or eye
> Could frame thy fearful symmetry?"
>
> William Blake - Songs of Experience -1794 England
>



-- 
--------------------------

Benedetti Alessandro
Visiting card : http://about.me/alessandro_benedetti

"Tyger, tyger burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?"

William Blake - Songs of Experience -1794 England

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