Marc, I wonder what's type of the field what kind of search you need on it filtering/ranking/boosting etc.
Thanks On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Marc Brette <marc.bre...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is something I am considering. > > Ideally, I'd like to use the same index though. > I do need to query with other constraint but that could be resolved to some > extent by merging results post query. > The real headache with different indexes is management: deleting document, > backup/restore. We also have some internal index splitting mechanism that > would need to be taken into account. > > On Friday, August 2, 2013, Michael Della Bitta wrote: > > > Marc, > > > > Do you need to be able to query this field at the same time as other > > fields, or is the searching case isolated? > > > > Because if you can isolate searches that hit this field to just this > field, > > you could do it with a sidecar index and joins. > > > > Michael Della Bitta > > > > Applications Developer > > > > o: +1 646 532 3062 | c: +1 917 477 7906 > > > > appinions inc. > > > > “The Science of Influence Marketing” > > > > 18 East 41st Street > > > > New York, NY 10017 > > > > t: @appinions <https://twitter.com/Appinions> | g+: > > plus.google.com/appinions< > > > https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/112002776285509593336/112002776285509593336/posts > > > > > w: appinions.com <http://www.appinions.com/> > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Marc Brette <marc.bre...@gmail.com > <javascript:;>> > > wrote: > > > > > Unfortunately, it needs to be searchable > > > > > > Very good pointer anyway, I'll keep that in mind > > > > > > On Friday, August 2, 2013, Michael Della Bitta wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Marc, > > > > > > > > Have you considered using ExternalFileField for this? > > > > On Aug 2, 2013 11:54 AM, "Marc Brette" <marc.bre...@gmail.com > <javascript:;> > > > <javascript:;>> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > I would like to completely populate a field for all the documents > in > > > the > > > > > index, without re-indexing the documents. > > > > > > > > > > I know Solr supports 'Atomic Update', but this is no a real > > incremental > > > > > update of a document: it costs as much as re-indexing the document > > (and > > > > > require to store the document). > > > > > As Solr does not support a real incremental update, I wondered if > > that > > > > > would be easier to completely re-populate a field (i.e. easier than > > > > > inserting/modifying in the middle of a field index). > > > > > > > > > > My use-case is the following: > > > > > - I have an index with a bunch of documents. > > > > > - A background process computes some additional metadata for the > > > > documents. > > > > > It produces metadata in batch for all the documents. > > > > > - These metadata are added in bulk to the existing index. > > > > > > > > > > Any ideas? Let me know if this is more a question for the dev list. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Sincerely yours Mikhail Khludnev Principal Engineer, Grid Dynamics <http://www.griddynamics.com> <mkhlud...@griddynamics.com>
