Hi Shawn, I typically set the field value to null in an atomic update if I want to remove the field. Eg: If a document is soft deleted via a field "isVisible":false , then I would want to drop its "content" field by setting it to null (since it is large and not required anymore) in an atomic update. So as a product behaviour, I am always expecting the behavior you mentioned for SolrJ 9.
-Rahul On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 2:14 PM Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org.invalid> wrote: > In SolrJ 4.7.2, if an atomic update request is sent with some fields set > to null (the object, not the string), then those fields will be ignored > when processing the atomic update -- no change. > > In SolrJ 9, a field set to null in an atomic update request will be > removed from the document. > > This is client behavior. The server behavior is the same whether it's > Solr 4 or Solr 9. > > Which behavior is correct? I would guess SolrJ 9, but I want to make > sure so I know whether to open an issue or not. > > Thanks, > Shawn > >
