Re: weird exception on update

2014-02-05 Thread Dmitry Kan
Hi Hoss, Thanks for replying. I have created a jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5697 It contains the required configs (actually a shard) and a query parser maven project. These illustrate the issue. I had to omit the solr.war from the webapps of the shard as it exceeded the upload

Re: weird exception on update

2014-02-04 Thread Chris Hostetter
: > We found out that: : > : > 1. this happens iff on two cores inside the same container there is a : > query parser defined via defType. : > 2. After removing index files on one of the cores, the delete by query : > works just fine. Right after restarting the container, the same query fails.

Re: weird exception on update

2014-02-04 Thread Dmitry Kan
We are still hitting an issue with two cores, each having their own custom query parser. The problem in passing {!qparser} is that the custom query parser can pretty much alter an input query into something that is not desirable for the delete by query operation. Is there any way of specifying ex

Re: weird exception on update

2014-02-03 Thread Dmitry Kan
The solution (or workaround?) is to drop the defType from one of the cores and use {!qparser} local param on every query, including the delete by query. It would be really great, if this could be handled on the solr config side only without involving the client changes. On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 4

Re: weird exception on update

2014-02-03 Thread Dmitry Kan
This exception is similar to what is talked about here: https://gist.github.com/mbklein/6367133 http://irc.projecthydra.org/2013-08-28.html We found out that: 1. this happens iff on two cores inside the same container there is a query parser defined via defType. 2. After removing index files on o

weird exception on update

2014-02-03 Thread Dmitry Kan
Hello! We are hitting a really strange and nasty issue when trying to delete by query and not when just adding documents. The exception says: http://pastebin.com/B1x5dAF7 Any ideas as to what is going on? The delete by query is referencing the unique field. The core's index does not contain the