Correct.  For an attempt to allow only field-level updates (without requiring 
the whole document to be re-analyzed and re-indexed) please see SOLR-139.


Otis
--
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch



----- Original Message ----
> From: Amit Nithian <anith...@gmail.com>
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Monday, May 4, 2009 1:03:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Update an existing Solr Index
> 
> I believe you do have to re-index the entire document. From what I have
> read, this is a Lucene limitation not a Solr one. I have run into this
> problem too and it's a pain to deal with. If you have data relevant for
> ranking but not searching, then consider storing it elsewhere and write a
> custom function to bring the data into Solr.
> - Amit
> 
> On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:18 AM, ahmed baseet wrote:
> 
> > As I know when you resend another index request with some old ID, old field
> > but new content, the old one gets overwritten by the new one.
> > @solr-users, Views???
> >
> > --Ahmed
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:26 PM, appleman1982 
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Hi All,
> > > I have a requirement wherein i want to update an existing index in solr.
> > > For example : I have issued an index command in solr as
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 123
> > > xxx
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> > > The id field is a unique key here.
> > >
> > > My requirement is that i should be able to update this inex i.e add
> > another
> > > field to it without the need to build the entire index again.
> > > For example
> > > if i issue the following solr command
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 123
> > > delhi
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> > > it should give me a merged index like
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 123
> > > xxx
> > > delhi
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> > >
> > > Any pointers or workarounds to achieve this in solr would be highly
> > > appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thanks, Jugesh
> > > --
> > > View this message in context:
> > >
> > http://www.nabble.com/Update-an-existing-Solr-Index-tp23366705p23366705.html
> > > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > >
> > >
> >

Reply via email to