[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15064?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17261315#comment-17261315
]
David Smiley commented on SOLR-15064:
-------------------------------------
No. hash("1!1") != hash("1!1!2")
But this trick works :) – separate the root ID (which doesn't have an
exclamation), with "/32!" and then something to make the child ID unique. So
root ID is "1" (nothing special), and child ID is "1/32!2". This syntax
specifies how many bits to use for the part left of the slash, thus we can get
it to use all the integer bits by saying 32.
https://nightlies.apache.org/Lucene/Solr-reference-guide-master/shards-and-indexing-data-in-solrcloud.html#document-routing
> 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
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Reporter: David Smiley
> Assignee: David Smiley
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: NestedDocuments
>
> 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-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
