Mailing-List: contact solr-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Indexing of documents in more than one step (SOLRJ)
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
References: <633b4029-f5c8-8535-e161-f264a6b37a29@man.poznan.pl>
 <b762bab3-4823-52d4-4fcd-7020ab8405de@sematext.com>
 <f43c3c3d-6be3-edbf-7c33-912b9ca90c3b@man.poznan.pl>
From: Emir Arnautovic <emir.arnautovic@sematext.com>
Message-ID: <eec443f5-b6b8-afff-5769-6b02b0b2b9fd@sematext.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 12:45:56 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f43c3c3d-6be3-edbf-7c33-912b9ca90c3b@man.poznan.pl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
archived-at: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:46:06 -0000

Which version of Solr do you use? Is it always the same field? Again, 
without checking anything, see if it could be that field is not 
multivalue and your value is.

In any case, this is inefficient way of indexing. If possible, stream 
both sources ordered by ID and merge them in one input doc and send to 
Solr.

Emir


On 15.02.2017 12:24, Maciej Ł. PCSS wrote:
> No, it's not the case. In both steps I'm indexing documents from the 
> same set of IDs (I mean the values of the 'id').
>
> Maciej
>
>
> W dniu 15.02.2017 o 11:07, Emir Arnautovic pisze:
>> I did not have time to test it or look at the code, but can you check 
>> if it could be the case when there is no document with a, b, c fields 
>> and you are trying to update it with d, e, f using partial update 
>> syntax.
>>
>> Emir
>>
>>
>> On 15.02.2017 09:25, Maciej Ł. PCSS wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>> how should I handle the following scenario using SOLRJ?  Index a 
>>> collection of documents (fill fields a, b, c). Then index the same 
>>> collection but this time fill fields d, e, f.
>>>
>>> In a pseudo-code it would be: step1(collectionX); 
>>> step2(collectionX); solrCommit();
>>>
>>> See my observations below:
>>> - first step is done by calling 
>>> SolrInputDocument.addField(fieldName, value); and this works fine.
>>> - if I do the same for the second step then all fields in my 
>>> documents get removed;
>>> - for that reason I need to call 
>>> SolrInputDocument.addField(fieldName, 
>>> Collections.singletonMap("set", value)); and then it's fine
>>> - but for some field, if I do the call from above, then the indexed 
>>> values are like "{set=value}" instead of just "value".
>>>
>>> Can somebody explain this strange behaviour to me?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Maciej
>>>
>>
>

-- 
Monitoring * Alerting * Anomaly Detection * Centralized Log Management
Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/