Hi Susheel,
My question is about the name of the "uniqueKey" field rather than the
composition of its values. By default, Solr uses a field with the name
"id". For reasons of ambiguity with the applications in my environment, I
am considering to change the field name to, for example, "docId". Is that
what you have also done for your compound keys?
One important aspect to consider after using a "uniqueKey" with a
different name is
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/6_3_0/solr-solrj/org/apache/solr/client/solrj/impl/CloudSolrClient.html
: "This class assumes the id field for your documents is called 'id' - if
this is not the case, you must set the right name with
setIdField(String)."
I am wondering whether there are more details or pitfalls that I should be
aware of?
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards,
Matthias Falkenberg
Team Lead - IBM Digital Experience Development
IBM Watson Content Hub, IBM WebSphere Portal, IBM Web Content Manager
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / Vorsitzende des
Aufsichtsrats: Martina Koederitz
Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart,
HRB 243294
From: Susheel Kumar
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Date: 05-02-17 03:21 AM
Subject:Re: Issues with uniqueKey != id?
Hello,
So far in my experience haven't come across scenario where unique key/id
is
not required. Most of the times, I have put combination of few fields
like aggregate
or compound keys <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compound_key>. (e.g.
organization_id + employee_id etc.). The reason it makes sense to have
some form of unique key is two fold
a) if there is no unique key, it kind of become impossible to update any
existing records since you can't uniquely identify them which means your
index will keep growing
b) If no unique key then when you return search results, you wouldn't
have
anything to relate with other/external system
Sometime you may have time-series data in which case may be timestamp or
combination of timestamp / other field may make sense but yes Unique key
is not mandatory.
Thanks,
Susheel
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Matthias X Falkenberg
wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> In the Solr Wiki I stumbled upon a somewhat vague statement on the
> uniqueKey:
>
> > https://wiki.apache.org/solr/SchemaXml#The_Unique_Key_Field
> > It shouldn't matter whether you rename this to something else (and
> change the value), but occasionally it has in the past. We
> recommend that you just leave this definition alone.
>
> I'd be very grateful for any positive or negative experiences with
> "uniqueKey" not being set to "id" - especially if your experiences are
> related to Solr 6.2.1+.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Matthias Falkenberg
>
> IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / Vorsitzende des
> Aufsichtsrats: Martina Koederitz
> Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht
Stuttgart,
> HRB 243294
>
>
