Re: SOLRJ Atomic updates of String field

e 6 Plus features a 5.5-inch retina HD display, the A8 chip > for faster processing and longer battery life, the M8 motion coprocessor to > track speed, distance and elevation, and with an 8MP iSight camera, you can > record 1080p HD Video at 60 FPS!} > > > > > -- > View

Re: SOLRJ Atomic updates of String field

ttery life, the M8 motion coprocessor to track speed, distance and elevation, and with an 8MP iSight camera, you can record 1080p HD Video at 60 FPS!} -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SOLRJ-Atomic-updates-of-String-field-tp4168809.html Sent from the Solr - Us

Re: SOLRJ Atomic updates of String field

longer battery life, the M8 motion coprocessor to > track speed, distance and elevation, and with an 8MP iSight camera, you can > record 1080p HD Video at 60 FPS!} > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SOLRJ-Atomic-update

SOLRJ Atomic updates of String field

in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SOLRJ-Atomic-updates-of-String-field-tp4168809.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: SolrJ | Atomic Updates | How works exactly?

ng well on solr 4.0? or better to wait until solr >> 4.1?! >> >> >> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- >> Von: ysee...@gmail.com [mailto:ysee...@gmail.com] Im Auftrag von Yonik >> Seeley >> Gesendet: Sonntag, 13. Januar 2013 20.24 >> An: solr-user@luce

Re: SolrJ | Atomic Updates | How works exactly?

icht- > Von: ysee...@gmail.com [mailto:ysee...@gmail.com] Im Auftrag von Yonik > Seeley > Gesendet: Sonntag, 13. Januar 2013 20.24 > An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Betreff: Re: SolrJ | Atomic Updates | How works exactly? > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Uwe Clement > wr

AW: SolrJ | Atomic Updates | How works exactly?

| Atomic Updates | How works exactly? On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Uwe Clement wrote: > What is the best the most performant way to update a large document? That *is* the best way to update a large document that we currently have. Although it re-indexes under the covers, it ensures that i

Re: SolrJ | Atomic Updates | How works exactly?

On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Uwe Clement wrote: > What is the best the most performant way to update a large document? That *is* the best way to update a large document that we currently have. Although it re-indexes under the covers, it ensures that it's atomic, and it's faster because it doe

AW: SolrJ | Atomic Updates | How works exactly?

performant way to update a large document? Any recommendations? THANKS! -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com] Gesendet: Sonntag, 13. Januar 2013 16.53 An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Betreff: Re: SolrJ | Atomic Updates | How works exactly? Atomic

Re: SolrJ | Atomic Updates | How works exactly?

> document. > > how can i do this? > > is there somewhere a good documentation? > > regards > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SolrJ-Atomic-Updates-How-works-exactly-tp4032976.html > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >

SolrJ | Atomic Updates | How works exactly?

i have very big documents in the index. i want to update a multivalue field of a document, without loading the whole document. how can i do this? is there somewhere a good documentation? regards -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SolrJ-Atomic-Updates-How

Re: SolrJ: atomic updates.

Uhm, after setting both Response and Request Writers it worked OK with * HttpSolrServer*. I´ve tried to find a way to set BinaryResponseParser and BinaryRequestWriter with *CloudServer *(or even via *LbHttpSolrServer*) but I found nothing. Suggestions? :-/ - Luis Cappa. 2012/11/15 Sami Siren

Re: SolrJ: atomic updates.

Try setting Request writer to binary like this: server.setParser(new BinaryResponseParser()); server.setRequestWriter(new BinaryRequestWriter()); Or then instead of string array use ArrayList() that contains your strings as the value for the map On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Luis

Re: SolrJ: atomic updates.

Hi, Sami. Doing some tests I´ve used the same code as you and did a quick execution: *HttpSolrServer server = new HttpSolrServer(" http://localhost:8080/solrserver/core1 ");* * * * try {* * * * HashMap editTags = new HashMap();* * editTags.put("

Re: SolrJ: atomic updates.

I´ll have a look to Solr source code and try to fix the bug. If I succeed I´ll update JIRA issue with it, :-) 2012/11/15 Sami Siren > Actually it seems that xml/binary request writers only behave differently > when using array[] as the value. if I use ArrayList it also works with the > xml form

Re: SolrJ: atomic updates.

Actually it seems that xml/binary request writers only behave differently when using array[] as the value. if I use ArrayList it also works with the xml format (4.1 branch). Still it's annoying that the two request writers behave differently so I guess it's worth adding the jira anyway. The Affect

Re: SolrJ: atomic updates.

Ok, done: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4080 Regards, - Luis Cappa. 2012/11/15 Luis Cappa Banda > Hello, Sami. > > It will be the first issue that I open so, should I create it under Solr > 4.0 version or in Solr 4.1.0 one? > > Thanks, > > - Luis Cappa. > > > 2012/11/15 Sami Sir

Re: SolrJ: atomic updates.

Hello, Sami. It will be the first issue that I open so, should I create it under Solr 4.0 version or in Solr 4.1.0 one? Thanks, - Luis Cappa. 2012/11/15 Sami Siren > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Luis Cappa Banda >wrote: > > > Thread update: > > > > When I use a simple: > > > > *Map oper

Re: SolrJ: atomic updates.

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Luis Cappa Banda wrote: > Thread update: > > When I use a simple: > > *Map operation = new HashMap();* > > > Instead of: > > *Map> operation = new HashMap List>();* > > > The result looks better, but it´s still wrong: > > fieldName: [ > "[Value1, Value2]" > ], > >

Re: SolrJ: atomic updates.

Thread update: When I use a simple: *Map operation = new HashMap();* Instead of: *Map> operation = new HashMap>();* The result looks better, but it´s still wrong: fieldName: [ "[Value1, Value2]" ], However, List value is received as a simple String "[Value1, Value2]". In other words, Sol

SolrJ: atomic updates.

Hello everyone, I´ve tested atomic updates via Ajax calls and now I´m starting with atomic updates via SolrJ... but the way I´m proceeding doesn´t seem to work well. Here is the snippet: *SolrInputDocument do = ne SolrInputDocument();* *doc.addField("id", "myId");* * * *Map> operation = new HashM