You may try. Content-type should be absolutely the same across parents and child-free. It may work now. Earlier, mixing blocks and childfrees in one index wasn't supported.
On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 2:57 AM Gajendra Dadheech <gajju3...@gmail.com> wrote: > That extra s was intentional, should have added a better name. > > So ideally we shouldn't have childfree and blocks together while indexing? > Or in the whole index they shouldn't be together, i.e. We should have > atleast one child doc for all if any of doc has one? > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 4:24 PM Mikhail Khludnev <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hello, Gajendra. > > Pics doesn't come through mailing list. > > May it caused by unnecessary s <field name="content_type">*s* > > parentDocument</field>? > > At least earlier mixing childfrees and blocks wasn't allowed, and caused > > some troubles. Usually, child stub used to keep childfrees in the index. > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 2:22 AM Gajendra Dadheech <gajju3...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi > > > > > > i want to ingest below documents, where there is a mix of nested and > > > un-nested documents: > > > <add> > > > <doc> > > > <field name="id">5</field> > > > <field name="_root_">5</field> > > > <field name="title">5Solr adds block join support</field> > > > <field name="content_type">sparentDocument</field> > > > </doc> > > > <doc> > > > <field name="id">1</field> > > > <field name="_root_">1</field> > > > <field name="title">Solr adds block join support</field> > > > <field name="content_type">parentDocument</field> > > > <doc> > > > <field name="id">2</field> > > > <field name="_root_">1</field> > > > <field name="comments">SolrCloud supports it too!</field> > > > <field name="content_type">childDocument</field> > > > </doc> > > > </doc> > > > <doc> > > > <field name="id">3</field> > > > <field name="_root_">3</field> > > > <field name="title">New Lucene and Solr release is out</field> > > > <field name="content_type">parentDocument</field> > > > <doc> > > > <field name="id">4</field> > > > <field name="_root_">4</field> > > > <field name="comments">Lots of new features</field> > > > <field name="content_type">childDocument</field> > > > </doc> > > > </doc> > > > </add> > > > > > > > > > Output of block join query after ingesting above docs: > > > [image: image.png] > > > > > > So doc id 5 is getting linked to doc id 1. Is this expected behavior, I > > > believ Id-5 should be a different document tree. > > > > > > Shall I Ingest them in some order ? > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sincerely yours > > Mikhail Khludnev > > > -- Sincerely yours Mikhail Khludnev
