Yes, currently when using Atomic updates _all_ fields have to be stored, except the _destinations_ of copyField directives.
Yes, it will make your index bigger. The affects on speed are probably minimal though. The stored data is in your *.fdt and *.fdx segments files and are not referenced only to pull the top N docs back, they're not referenced for _search_ at all. Coming Real Soon will be updateable DocValues, which may be what you really need. Best, Erick On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Mark Robinson <mark123lea...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have some 150 fields in my schema out of which about 100 are dynamic > fields which I am not storing (stored="false"). > In case I need to do an atomic update to one or two fields which belong to > the stored list of fields, do I need to change my dynamic fields (100 or so > now not "stored") to stored="true"? > > If so wouldn't it considerably increase index size and affect performance > in the negative? > > Is there any way currently to do partial/ atomic updates to one or two > fields (which I will make stored="true") without having to make my now > stored="false" fields to stored="true" just > to accommodate atomic updates. > > Could some one pls give your suggestions. > > Thanks! > Mark.
