You could build your index using Lucene directly and then point a
Solr instance at it once its built. My suspicion is that the
overhead of forming a document as an XML string and posting to Solr
via HTTP won't be that much different than indexing with Lucene
directly.
My largest Solr
On Feb 20, 2007, at 1:46 PM, Jack L wrote:
The numbers vary quite a bit though, from 13 docs/s (Burkamp)
to 250 docs/s (Walter) to 1000 docs/s I understand the results also
depend
on the doc size and hardware.
my number 1000 was per minute, not second! however, i've done a few
runs
On Feb 21, 2007, at 4:37 PM, Jack L wrote:
2. For each index, do I need to copy this directory and start
a solr instance? Is it possible to run one solr instance
for multiple indices?
Further on this than Hoss mentioned... you can share a common
configuration among multiple Solr instances
On Feb 21, 2007, at 4:25 PM, Jack L wrote:
couple of times today at around 158 documents / sec.
This is not bad at all. How about search performance?
How many concurrent queries have people been having?
What does the response time look like?
I'm the only user :) What I've done is a
On Feb 21, 2007, at 9:29 PM, Jack L wrote:
Thanks Chris and Eric for the replies. Very helpful.
no, each instance manages a single schema and a single data index
-- but
thta schema can allow for various differnt types of documents that
don't
need to have anything in common.
Does this
On Feb 22, 2007, at 11:30 PM, Gmail Account wrote:
I use solr for searching and facets and love it.. The performance
is awesome.
However I am about to add tagging to my application and I'm having
a hard time deciding if I should just database my tags for now
until a better solr solution
On Feb 23, 2007, at 5:33 PM, rubdabadub wrote:
Does Solr supports ontology somehow? Has it been tried? Any tips on
how should I go about doing so?
What are you wanting to do exactly?
Erik
On Feb 24, 2007, at 3:36 AM, Pierre-Yves LANDRON wrote:
it will be easy to add. take a look at a simple SolrRequestHandler:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/solr/trunk/src/java/org/
apache/solr/handler/IndexInfoRequestHandler.java
this gets the IndexReader and writes out some stuff.
On Feb 24, 2007, at 6:26 AM, Erik Hatcher wrote:
On Feb 24, 2007, at 3:36 AM, Pierre-Yves LANDRON wrote:
it will be easy to add. take a look at a simple SolrRequestHandler:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/solr/trunk/src/java/org/
apache/solr/handler/IndexInfoRequestHandler.java
On Mar 7, 2007, at 9:20 PM, Jack L wrote:
Selecting by type will do the job. But I suppose it sacrifice
performance because having multiple document types in the same
index will render a larger index. Is it bad?
A many documents we talking here?
My hunch is you'll be fine :)
Erik
On Mar 8, 2007, at 10:52 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
or something like...
level1Dir1/level1
level2Subdir1/level2
level3SubSubDir1/level3
...but this is why Hierarchical facets are hard.
I've not yet tackled hierarchical facets myself despite the demand
being there. It seems there are
On Mar 9, 2007, at 6:46 AM, rubdabadub wrote:
On 3/9/07, Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We use jetty on a few applications with no problem. I recommend it
unless and until you outgrow it (but I doubt you will). Resin, in
my past experience with it, is fantastic. But no need to even
On Mar 14, 2007, at 11:09 AM, Brian Whitman wrote:
The recommendation is to firewall off Solr so only your
application server can access it. Solr is not at all designed
for direct client (browser, etc) access.
Assuming you lock down update properly, what's the problem? We are
On Mar 16, 2007, at 5:17 AM, shjiang wrote:
I don't understand how solr make field-specific analysis possible .In
the source code ,they didn't use the PerFieldAnalyzerWrapper class.Can
any one tell me something about that?
It's configured through schema.xml.Solr has a fairly
Why in the world would you want to analyze your unique id?
Erik
On Mar 16, 2007, at 6:07 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
we have been using Solr for a month now and we are running into a
lot of
trouble .
one of the issues is a problem with the unique id field.
can this
On Mar 16, 2007, at 2:21 PM, Andrew Nagy wrote:
Is their a science to choosing a cache sizes? I have about 500,000
records and am seeing a lot of evictions, about 50% of lookups.
What factors can i look at to determine what my cache sizes should be?
Roughly you could start with getting a
You've got your field set to be analyzed, and its using a stemmer.
Chances are you don't intend to analyze the fields you're faceting on
(and if you are doing that intentionally, performance caveats
apply). Check that the field type is string and re-index.
Erik
On Mar 16, 2007,
On Mar 20, 2007, at 9:36 AM, thomas arni wrote:
Thanks for you hint. I looked at the features of Flare.
I'm wondering if there is only a user interface for Rails. It looks
like Flare mostly focus on faceted browsing. Faceted browsing is
not my first priority. I'm developing a full-text
On Mar 20, 2007, at 5:18 PM, Antonio Eggberg wrote:
Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] skrev:
Faceting only appears in Flare when there are *_facet fields in
your index. Flare is going to undergo another spurt of evolution
over the next couple of weeks as I tease it apart into a Rails
plugin
Lucene now supports *456* type queries, however it requires setting
an attribute to allow leading wildcards on the QueryParser. Solr
does not set this flag (that I can tell in my quick search) so I
don't believe you can do this with Solr currently, until/unless an
option is made to set
On Mar 23, 2007, at 3:26 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On 3/23/07, Mike Klaas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/23/07, Chris Hostetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: But the response isn't highlighted using fuzzy or wildcard
searches...
Hmmm... this seems like a bug in the highlighting, using the
On Mar 26, 2007, at 7:52 AM, Thierry Collogne wrote:
Hello,
I have a field sitename that can contain a word with character,
HR
O.
Problem is when I do the following query : sitename:HR O, I get
search
results that don't have HR O in the sitename field.
Is it possible that there is
It would be great to have solr-ruby (the library formerly known as
solrb) included with Solr distributions, as well as Flare too. It
would give these libraries visibility and usability they'd not see if
they required additional downloads or svn co. I can certainly say
that solr-ruby does
I have a client need to embed Solr behind an already built custom TCP/
IP interface (currently for Lucene, but want to swap in Solr to
benefit from its additional goodness of course). Have folks already
done this? Experiences? Or perhaps there are some thoughts on why
this may or may
with or without HTTP -- I know thats not
what it was intended for, but solr makes lucene so much more
manageable even without a server!
On 4/2/07, Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a client need to embed Solr behind an already built custom
TCP/
IP interface (currently for Lucene
On Apr 4, 2007, at 7:28 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
Is there / should there be a way to access the three core caches?
there should. +1
I want to be able to programmatic check the cache sizes and make sure
they are big enough for faceting.
i could use the same thing!
Erik
A
On Apr 6, 2007, at 1:51 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
Quick poll... Solr 2.1 release planning is underway, and a new logo
may be a part of that.
What form of logo do you prefer, A or B? There may be further
tweaks to these pictures, but I'd like to get a sense of what the user
community likes.
On Apr 11, 2007, at 2:25 AM, alartin wrote:
I wonder is there a solr web service available? or I have to use
tools like
Apache httpClient to send requests and get responses? Many thanks.
There currently is no SOAP interface to Solr, if that is what you mean.
However, many consider data
There is a solr.py in the Solr clients directory:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/solr/trunk/client/python/solr.py
It's got some utility methods for generating field's.
Erik
On Apr 15, 2007, at 6:47 PM, Jack L wrote:
Doing queries is so easy with Python, thanks to
On Apr 19, 2007, at 6:56 AM, Michael Kimsal wrote:
It's bugged us a little bit, because it's something that we need
(to be able to emulate the previous foo LIKE '%bar%' SQL behaviour
we're
replacing), but can't offer our users yet.
I have also run into this issue and have intended to fix
On Apr 19, 2007, at 9:32 AM, Jennifer Seaman wrote:
Can anyone provide a quick tutorial on how to setup facet browsing?
After a keyword search I just want to allow the user to narrow the
results by category, then by state, then by city and then by company.
Some sample code would be
On Apr 19, 2007, at 10:39 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On 4/19/07, Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
parser.setAllowLeadingWildcards(true);
I have also run into this issue and have intended to fix up Solr to
allow configuring that switch on QueryParser.
Any reason
On Apr 19, 2007, at 11:04 AM, Michael Kimsal wrote:
Perhaps I'm simplifying it a bit. It would certainly help out our
comfort
level
to have it either be on or configurable by default, rather than
having to
maintain a
'patched' version (yes, the patch is only one line, but it's the
On Apr 19, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Michael Kimsal wrote:
It's not that I don't *want* to contribute, but hardly have enough
time to
get the basics
done some days.
You can rest assured that all of us here are in that same boat. :)
And you can also rest assured that the switch your asking for
Matthew,
All that is meant by object_types is an additional stored/indexed
field in the Solr schema that gets added to every document providing
context of which type it is (shoes or brands). Then you can limit
searches to a particular area by just filtering on type:shoes, for
example.
On Apr 19, 2007, at 7:47 PM, Michael Thessel wrote:
in my logs I get from time to time this message:
INFO: PERFORMANCE WARNING: Overlapping onDeckSearchers=2
What does this mean? What can I do to avoid this?
I think you have issued multiple commits (or optimizes) that hadn't
fully
Sorry, I missed the original mail. Hoss has got it right.
Personally I'd love to see acts_as_solr definitively come into the
solr-ruby fold.
Regarding your questions:
: 1. What are other alternatives are available for ruby integration
with solr
: other than acts-as_solr plugin.
'={
'status'=0,
'QTime'=105,
'params'={
'wt'='ruby',
'rows'='0',
'facet.query'=['ant',
'lucene'],
'facet'='on',
'indent'='on',
'q'='erik hatcher'}},
'response'={'numFound'=3,'start'=0,'docs'=[]
},
'facet_counts'={
'facet_queries'={
'ant
On Apr 20, 2007, at 7:11 AM, Burkamp, Christian wrote:
I'm using filter queries to implement document level security with
solr.
The caching mechanism for filters separate from queries comes in handy
and the system performs well once all the filters for the users of the
system are stored in
On Apr 20, 2007, at 2:30 PM, solruser wrote:
For pure Ruby access to Solr without a database, use solr-ruby. The
0.01 gem is available as gem install solr-ruby, but if you can I'd
recommend you tinker with the trunk codebase too.
Well I say, considering use of solr with rails application.
On Apr 21, 2007, at 9:42 PM, Erik Hatcher wrote:
source = DataSource.new
mapping = {
:id = :isbn,
:name = :author,
:source = BOOKS,
:year = Proc.new {|record| record.date[0,4] },
}
Solr::Indexer.index(source, mapper) do |orig_data, solr_document|
solr_document[:timestamp] = Time.now
What it probably boils down to is how you analyzed (or didn't) those
fields.
What is your schema for those fields?
Erik
On Apr 25, 2007, at 4:40 PM, Michael Kimsal wrote:
leading and trailing at the same time don't work. :( This is
supposedly
fixed in a lucene nightly, but I
On Apr 26, 2007, at 5:43 PM, Michael Kimsal wrote:
I've looked through the mailing lists and can't find much of anything
regarding case sensitivity. It
seems SOLR is case sensitive by default - I'm using the default
settings
with a very basic schema - just text fields.
All depends on the
On Apr 26, 2007, at 6:03 PM, Michael Kimsal wrote:
My colleague, after some digging, found in SolrQueryParser
(around line 62)
setLowercaseExpandedTerms(false);
The default for Lucene is true. Was this intentional? Or an
oversight?
I was just about to respond that this is likely the
On Apr 30, 2007, at 11:16 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On 4/30/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. I would like to be able to tell how many facet values are there
total. (This would be a value like numFound for the results).
Is there such a thing or a workaround like for 1.
If you want to do this as a single delete-by-query, you could OR all
the clauses together:
deletequeryload_id:(20070424150841 OR 20070425145301 )/
query/delete
Erik
On May 1, 2007, at 2:14 AM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
escher2k wrote:
I am trying to remove documents from my index
On May 1, 2007, at 7:42 PM, ericp wrote:
Cool, I noticed a ruby-Flare-Solr presentation too who is giving that?
I proposed that one.
Erik
Jack,
On May 13, 2007, at 6:45 PM, Jack L wrote:
1. I didn't understand the part above in your reply. If I search for
samsung camera, the query should be like this in the select URL:
q=samsung+camera
And if samsung is mandatory, the query will be like this: (or not:)
q=+samsung+camera
On May 21, 2007, at 10:52 PM, Gary Browne wrote:
I'm wondering if anyone has any hints on how to prepare TEI documents
for indexing - I was about to write some XSLT but didn't want to
reinvent the wheel (unless it's punctured)?
I'm using Ruby to index TEI files, and leveraging the XPathMapper
On May 22, 2007, at 9:58 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I use Solr to search through a set of about 200,000 documents. Each
document has a numeric ID. How to do the following:
1) I use facets and want to return the facets for all documents
as the starting point of the user interface. In
On May 22, 2007, at 10:07 AM, Will Johnson wrote:
2) Each document will be shown to the user with a check box next to
it.
I want to user to be able to select certain documents and save their
ids some where else. This is not a problem. However, I also want to
give
the user an ability to say
On May 22, 2007, at 11:31 AM, Martin Grotzke wrote:
You need to specify the constrants (facet.query or facet.field
params)
Too bad, so we would have either to know the schema in the application
or provide queries for index metadata / the schema / faceting info.
However, the
On May 22, 2007, at 1:36 PM, Martin Grotzke wrote:
For sure, perhaps the schema field element could be extended by an
attribute isfacet
There is no effective difference between a facet field and any
other indexed field. What fields are facets is application
specific and not really
Andrew,
Nightlies are available here: http://people.apache.org/builds/lucene/
solr/nightly/ (a link exists on the wiki main page, for future
reference).
Erik
On May 24, 2007, at 2:28 PM, Andrew Nagy wrote:
While I am on this topic, I think it might be nice to have a
nightly
On May 24, 2007, at 3:47 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
currently no.
Right now you even need a new request for each delete...
Unless you used delete-by-query with the id's OR'd
deletequeryid:1 OR id:2 OR id:3/query/delete
Patrick Givisiez wrote:
can I add and delete docs at same
Just to be clear, [* TO *] does not necessarily return all
documents. It returns all documents that have a value in the
specified (or default) field. Be careful with that! *:*, however,
does match all documents.
Erik
On May 25, 2007, at 5:49 AM, Burkamp, Christian wrote:
On Jun 1, 2007, at 10:47 PM, Mike Klaas wrote:
Am I just doing something wrong?
No. Lucene sometimes just requires many file descriptors (this
will be somewhat alleviated with Solr 1.2). I suggest upping the
open file limit (I upped mine from 1024 to 45000 to handle huge
indices).
On Jun 6, 2007, at 5:32 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
: It's the favicon.ico effect.
: Nothing in logs when the class is resquested from curl, but with a
: browser (here Opera), begin a response with html, and it
requests for
: favicon.ico.
HA HA HA HA that's freaking hilarious.
One
On Jun 12, 2007, at 8:51 AM, Ard Schrijvers wrote:
is it possible to configure solr to store the document URI in the
lucene index (the URI is not an xml field, but just the document's
location)?
Yes. Set the field to be store and non-indexed, field type string
is what I use.
Or is
Vika - no, Solr's add-document XML syntax is not flexible in the way
you've described. Solr fronts a Lucene index. A Lucene index is
made up of Documents which have Fields. Fields are a flat structure,
not hierarchical. The trick to leveraging Solr and Lucene
successfully is in the
Begin forwarded message:
From: J Aaron Farr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Call for Papers Opens for OS Summit Asia 2007
The call for papers is now open for OS Summit Asia, to be held
November 26-30 at the Cyberport in Hong Kong. This joint conference
between the Apache Software Foundation and the
On Jun 23, 2007, at 11:24 PM, Jack L wrote:
I have some documents, each has a number of tags. I'd like to
have a query to return similar documents which share largest
number of tags with a given document. For example, if I have
doc that has 4 tags, and I'd like to return docs that also
have
On Jun 25, 2007, at 3:43 PM, Jack L wrote:
MoreLikeThis is interesting. So in order to use it through the
MoreLikeThisHandler, I should use the unique field in
the q param to uniquely identify the this document? Or, does
it also support a more common query and works as More Like These
just like
On Jun 26, 2007, at 6:46 AM, michael ravits wrote:
hello solrs
is it possible to query multiple specific ids?
something like this:
deletequerymediaId:6720,6721,6722,8762,9754/query/delete
sure, but you need to use proper query parser syntax:
mediaId:(6720 OR 6721 OR )
On Jul 4, 2007, at 12:00 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
in solrconf.xml I found this entry, which is now uncomented
dataDir${solr.data.dir:./solr/data}/dataDir before it was
!--
dataDir./solr/data/dataDir
--
Don't know if this is the desired behaviour. How should I change
the entry
Yup, it's that simple! :)
Erik
On Jul 5, 2007, at 5:42 PM, Thiago Jackiw wrote:
Is it that simple? Cool, I'll give it a try.
--
Thiago Jackiw
On 7/5/07, Martin Grotzke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 12:39 -0700, Thiago Jackiw wrote:
Is there a way for a record
On Jul 27, 2007, at 6:17 AM, Erik Hatcher wrote:
On Jul 26, 2007, at 10:26 PM, Sundling, Paul wrote:
Are there any known Solr sites that are in Chinese or Japenese?
This might be the first mention of this project in the Solr
community, and I'm certainly not confident our server can
On Jul 26, 2007, at 10:26 PM, Sundling, Paul wrote:
Are there any known Solr sites that are in Chinese or Japenese?
This might be the first mention of this project in the Solr
community, and I'm certainly not confident our server can handle the
load but here goes anyway :)
I'm working on a project that embeds Solr, much like the EmbeddedSolr
example posted here http://wiki.apache.org/solr/EmbeddedSolr.
The application generally runs fine, with very rapid handling of
indexing and search requests, however at heavy load we're
experiencing Lock obtain timed out:
Thanks Mike and Yonik! I've upgraded the project to trunk Solr,
added in the SingleInstanceLockFactory setting and bumped the write
lock timeout. I personally haven't duplicated the issue (all works
fine on my development box) but the client will give it a try in
their test environment
On Aug 9, 2007, at 4:49 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
lo - these things can happen when you get too many levels of
escaping needed.
Hopefully we can improve the situation in the future to get rid of the
query parser escaping for certain queries such as prefix and term.
+1 :)
this is
Yes - they come back in the order indexed.
Erik
On Aug 19, 2007, at 7:20 PM, Yu-Hui Jin wrote:
BTW, Hoss, is there a default order for the documents returned by
running
this query?
thanks,
-Hui
On 8/16/07, Chris Hostetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Any of you know whether
For other Solr instances (whether embedded or not) to refresh their
index searchers, send a commit/ message to them.
Erik
On Aug 21, 2007, at 7:33 AM, sinking wrote:
Hello,
I have tried to use the EmbeddedSolr (http://wiki.apache.org/solr/
EmbeddedSolr) because i want to work
On Aug 21, 2007, at 9:25 PM, Lance Norskog wrote:
Recently someone mentioned that it would be possible to have a
'replace
existing document' feature rather than just dropping and adding
documents
with the same unique id.
There is such a patch:
On Aug 24, 2007, at 5:29 PM, Wu, Daniel wrote:
Theoretically and practically, embedded solution will be faster than
going through http/xml. I would like to see solr has some sort of
document source adapter architecture which will iterate through all
the
documents available in the document
On Aug 27, 2007, at 9:32 AM, Jae Joo wrote:
Is there any way to catagorize by price range?
I would like to do facet by price range. (ex. 100-200, 201-500,
501-1000,
...)
Yes, look at using facet queries using range queries. There is an
example of this very thing here:
that, but no real reason to with Solr's caching making the
range buckets fast at query time.
Could you elaborate on what you are trying to do?
Erik
Thanks,
Jae
On 8/27/07, Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 27, 2007, at 9:32 AM, Jae Joo wrote:
Is there any way
On Sep 1, 2007, at 9:28 AM, Jae Joo wrote:
I have a Java Heap size problem during indexing for 13 millions
doc. under
linux using post.sh (optimized).
each document size is about 2k.
Is there any way to set java heap size in post.sh under tomcat?
post.sh is a Solr *client*. Your heap size
or the
javax extension methods?
What about the new release of jython?
Erik
On 8/30/07 6:57 PM, Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 30, 2007, at 6:31 PM, Mike Klaas wrote:
Another reason why people use stored procs is to prevent multiple
round-trips in a multi-stage query
On Sep 3, 2007, at 12:22 AM, James O'Rourke wrote:
Is there a way to pass the solr server a set of documents without
all the fields present and only update the fields that are provided
leaving the remaining document fields intact or do I need to pull
those documents over the wire myself
multiValued fields retain their order, for the record.
Erik
On Sep 4, 2007, at 12:37 AM, Jed Reynolds wrote:
One of the difficulties that you're going to find with multi-valued
fields is that they are an unordered collection without relation.
If you have a document with a list of
On Sep 5, 2007, at 3:30 AM, Dilip.TS wrote:
I would like to know if can implement the Embedded SOLR using the
SOLR
collection distribution?
Partly... the rsync method of getting a master index to the slaves
would work, but you'd need a way to commit/ to the slaves so that
they reload
I guess my warning is more because I play on the edge and have
several times ended up tweaking various apps solrconfig.xml's as I
upgraded them to keep things working.
Anyway, we'll all agree that diff'ing your config files with the
example app can be useful.
Erik
On Sep 5,
On Sep 6, 2007, at 3:29 AM, Doss wrote:
We are running an appalication built using SOLR, now we are trying
to build
a tagging system using the existing SOLR indexed field called
tag_keywords, this field has different keywords seperated by
comma, please
give suggestions on how can we build
On Sep 6, 2007, at 2:56 PM, Matthew Runo wrote:
On a related note, it'd be great if we could set up a series of
transformations to be done on data when it comes into the index,
before being indexed. I guess a custom tokenizer might be the best
way to do this though..?
ie:
-Post
-Data is
,
Mohandoss
On 9/6/07, Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 6, 2007, at 3:29 AM, Doss wrote:
We are running an appalication built using SOLR, now we are trying
to build
a tagging system using the existing SOLR indexed field called
tag_keywords, this field has different keywords
I just added brief mentions of some upcoming Lucene/Solr-related
events to this page:
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/OnTheRoad
Below is some self-promotion of an upcoming class I have agreed to
teach. It's uncomfortable to send this sort of thing out, but if I
don't then you might
On Sep 7, 2007, at 4:32 PM, Lance Norskog wrote:
Otherwise, the only downside of dynamic fields is that you can't
say, give
me fields a*_t but not b*_t in a query. I haven't found others in
the mail
archives or the wiki.
We're gonna fix this one. It's part of this issue for now:
On Sep 10, 2007, at 3:07 PM, Mike Klaas wrote:
On 10-Sep-07, at 11:54 AM, melkink wrote:
The other change I made (which may or may not have contributed to the
solution) was to remove all line breaks from the text being
submitted to the
doctext field. The line breaks were causing solr to
Matt,
Try this instead:
gem install solr-ruby # ;)
Then in irb or wherever:
solr = Solr::Connection.new(http://localhost:8983/solr;)
solr.add(:id = 123, :title = insert title here)
solr.commit
solr.query(title)
Visit us over on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] e-mail list for more
on
On Sep 11, 2007, at 5:13 PM, melkink wrote:
Erik Hatcher wrote:
melkink - are you using solr-ruby? If so, that bug has been fixed in
later versions ;)
Erik
Erik,
Indeed I am! Thanks for letting me know that there's a new version
available that fixes this bug. Like I
On Sep 13, 2007, at 12:50 PM, Matthew Runo wrote:
Can you not facet on fields which are not indexed? Am I missing
something here?
No. Faceting works off of terms, which are either the exact field
value for unanalyzed fields, or the tokens that result from the
configured analyzer.
Cuong,
I accomplished (in Collex) by attaching a batch number to each
document. When indexing a batch (or source), a GUID is generated and
every document from that batch/source gets that same identifier
attached to it. At the end of the indexing run, I delete everything
with that
On Sep 14, 2007, at 12:33 PM, Nathaniel E. Powell wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/
HighlightingParameters#head-23ecd5061bc2c86a
561f85dc1303979fe614b956
where it talks about the hl.snippets parameter, it says that it can be
overridden on a per-field basis. I haven't been able to find any
On Sep 14, 2007, at 8:19 AM, Thompson,Roger wrote:
I am embarking on re-engineering an application using Solr/Lucene (If
you'd like to see the current manifestation go to:
fictionfinder.oclc.org). The database for this application
consists of
approximatly 1.4 million records of varying size
On Sep 18, 2007, at 2:45 AM, Dilip.TS wrote:
Is it possible to Search items with in the search results using
SOLR. If
so how?
Simply AND the previous query to the new query, or use the
previous query as a filter query (fq=...) parameter.
Erik
On Sep 18, 2007, at 7:14 AM, Dilip.TS wrote:
Hi,
I have the following requirement:
When the user searches for the keyword say Java Programming , the
user
should be shown the results satisfying the condition Java AND
Programming.
But when he types Java Programming (i.e within double
On Sep 26, 2007, at 7:28 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
cool = (popularity:[100 TO *] (+numFeatures:[10 TO *] +price:[0
TO 10]))
lame = (+popularity:[* TO 99] +numFeatures:[* TO 9] +price:[11
TO *])
That example is definitely in the cool category. I couldn't resist
creating a
On Sep 27, 2007, at 2:50 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
to answer the broader question of using customized
LUcene SortComparatorSource objects in solr -- it is in fact possible.
In Solr, all decisisons about how to sort are driven by
FieldTypes. You
can subclass any of the FieldTypes that come
On Oct 4, 2007, at 4:38 AM, Robert Young wrote:
1. Is there a REST interface for getting index stats? I would
particularly like access to terms and their document frequencies,
prefereably filtered by a query.
Yes, the Luke request handler provides deeper views into the index
information:
101 - 200 of 1610 matches
Mail list logo
