Hello please find the comments inline On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 12:43 PM Uday Kumar <uday.p...@indiamart.com.invalid> wrote:
> Hi all, > *In Place updates:* > Works with fields which are non-indexed and non-stored docValue-based numeric fields. > 1. This meant we cannot query on this field and cannot display the value of > the field. > Such fields at least might be queried with range query parser, but iirc (but might be wrong), there's a handling in regular term:query syntax for such fields. > 2. Found one contradictory statement in *in-place* updates section > Link > < > https://solr.apache.org/guide/solr/latest/indexing-guide/partial-document-updates.html#in-place-updates > > > "In regular **atomic updates,** > the entire document is reindexed internally > during the application of the update. > However, in this approach, (implying in-place udt) > only the > fields to be updated are affected and the rest of the documents are not > reindexed internally" > > Isn't this contradictory with the atomic updates concept? > Yes. It is clear to me. Don't see a contraction. Please share your experiment results afterwards. -- Sincerely yours Mikhail Khludnev
