Re: How to make a field mandatory in the schema?
required=true ? field name=id type=string indexed=true stored=true required=true / Koji Gudata wrote: Is it possible to make a field for a document mandatory in the solr schema or I must validate my xml against my document xml schema before I post it to SOLR for update?
How to make a field mandatory in the schema?
Is it possible to make a field for a document mandatory in the solr schema or I must validate my xml against my document xml schema before I post it to SOLR for update? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/How-to-make-a-field-mandatory-in-the-schema--tp18828259p18828259.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
dismax bq
I'd like to be able to specify query term weights/boosts, which it sounds like bq was created for. I think my understanding from the wiki is a bit rough, so I'm hoping I might be able to get some questions answered here. Any thoughts/comments are much appreciated. I initially tried simply passing a dismax-style query in bq w/ an empty q param and got no results. Is this because bq terms must specify fields. I.e. bq=shoes won't work, but bq=title:shoes will boost docs that match shoes in the title field? Does bq simply add boosts to query terms? Say my only qf is title and q=bootsbq=shoes^0.5. Does this translate to a lucene query of q=title:boots^1.0+title:shoes^0.5. If, instead, q=shoes+boots, would the lucene query be q=title:boots^1.0+title:shoes^1.5 ? Is it possible to negatively boost a term without completely negging it? I.e. is it possible to do something like q=shoesbq=bags^-1.0 ? Thanks, Jason
Re: solr 1.3 ??
Thanks for response Norberto
Problem is that ..we can not use non release version whilst starting new
project.
For e.g.: if you use one method which is introduced in DataImportHAndler and
later in point in solr 1.3, same method is removed then we have to revise
all code.
Can we get solr 1.3 release as soon as possible? Otherwise some interim
release (1.2.x) containing DataImportHandler will also a good option.
Are we expecting solr 1.3 release soon ???
~Vikrant
Norberto Meijome-2 wrote:
On Mon, 4 Aug 2008 21:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
Vicky_Dev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can we get solr 1.3 release as soon as possible? Otherwise some interim
release (1.2.x) containing DataImportHandler will also a good option.
Any Thoughts?
have you tried one of the nightly builds? I've been following it every so
often...sometimes there is a problem, but hardly ever... you can find a
build
you are comfortable with, and it'll be far closer to the actual 1.3 when
released than 1.2 .
B
_
{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome
Quantum Logic Chicken:
The chicken is distributed probabalistically on all sides of the
road until you observe it on the side of your course.
I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery when
wet.
Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You have
been
Warned.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/solr-1.3tp18824290p18833196.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: solr 1.3 ??
Hi Vikrant, I would second Norberto's suggestion to use a nightly for now. Release planning for 1.3 is underway and we are actively working towards that. Hopefully, we should be able to get it out in a month assuming there are no show stoppers, however there is no hard date yet. There's been a lot of changes in Solr since 1.2 release which makes it very difficult for DataImportHandler to work with Solr 1.2. Since we are close towards a new release, I don't forsee any activity towards making DataImportHandler compatible with 1.2. Backward incompatible changes in the new features introduced with 1.3 are rare even in nightly builds but yes, they are possible. However, I don't forsee any major overhaul in DataImportHandler right now. On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 8:40 PM, Vicky_Dev [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Thanks for response Norberto Problem is that ..we can not use non release version whilst starting new project. For e.g.: if you use one method which is introduced in DataImportHAndler and later in point in solr 1.3, same method is removed then we have to revise all code. Can we get solr 1.3 release as soon as possible? Otherwise some interim release (1.2.x) containing DataImportHandler will also a good option. Are we expecting solr 1.3 release soon ??? ~Vikrant -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/solr-1.3tp18824290p18833196.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Regards, Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
Re: Diagnostic tools
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Kashyap, Raghu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are there are tools that are available to view the indexing process? We have a cron process which posts XML files to the solr index server. However, we are NOT seeing the documents posted correctly and we are also NOT getting any errors from the client You need to send a commit before index changes become visible. -Yonik
Unlock on startup
Hi All, I am having to test solr indexing quite a bit on my local and dev environments. I had the unlockOnStartuptrue/unlockOnStartup. But restarting my server still doesn't seem to remove the writelock file. Is there some other configuration that I might have to do get this fixed. My Configurations : Solr 1.3 on Windows xp(local) and RHL on dev box. Jboss 4.05 Regards Sundar _ Searching for the best deals on travel? Visit MSN Travel. http://msn.coxandkings.co.in/cnk/cnk.do
unique key
I currently have multiple documents that i would like to index but i would like to combine two fields to produce the unique key. the documents either have 1 or the other fields so by combining the two fields i will get a unique result. is this possible in the solr schema?
Re: solr 1.3 ??
On Aug 5, 2008, at 11:10 AM, Vicky_Dev wrote: Thanks for response Norberto Problem is that ..we can not use non release version whilst starting new project. I would think that is when you can most live with it, since you aren't close to production yet, but that's your call, not mine. For e.g.: if you use one method which is introduced in DataImportHAndler and later in point in solr 1.3, same method is removed then we have to revise all code. Can we get solr 1.3 release as soon as possible? Otherwise some interim release (1.2.x) containing DataImportHandler will also a good option. The DIH is marked as experimental, anyway, so just b/c you incorporate it in 1.3 does not mean it isn't going to change in 1.4. That being said, we do strive to maintain back-compatibility. -Grant
RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting
Hi all, I seemed to have found the solution to this problem. Apparently, allocating enough virtual memory on the server seems to only solve on half of the problem. Even after allocating 4 gigs of Virtual memory on jboss server, I still did get the Out of memory on sorting. I didn't how ever notice that the LRU cache on my config was set to default which was still 512 megs of max memory. I had to increase that to a round 2 gigs and the sorting did work perfectly ok. Even though I am satisfied that I have found the solution to the problem, i am still not satisfied to know that Sort consumes so much memory. In no products have I seen sorting 10 fields take up 1 gig and half of virtual memory. I am not sure, if there could be a better implementation of this. But something doesn't seem right to me. Thanks for all your support. It has truly been overwhelming. Sundar From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:43:05 -0700 A sneaky source of OutOfMemory errors is the permanent generation. If you add this: -XX:PermSize=64m -XX:MaxPermSize=96m You will increase the size of the permanent generation. We found this helped. Also note that when you undeploy a war file, the old deployment has permanent storage that is not reclaimed, and so each undeploy/redeploy cycle eats up the permanent generation pool. -Original Message- From: david w [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 7:20 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Out of memory on Solr sorting Hi, Daniel I got the same probem like Sundar. Is that possible to tell me what profiling tool you are using? thx a lot. /David On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Daniel Alheiros [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Hi Sundar. Well it would be good if you could do some profiling on your Solr app. I've done it during the indexing process so I could figure out what was going on in the OutOfMemoryErrors I was getting. But you won't definitelly need to have as much memory as your whole index size. I have a 3.5 million documents (aprox. 10Gb) running on this 2Gb heap VM. Cheers, Daniel -Original Message- From: sundar shankar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 23 July 2008 23:45 To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting Hi Daniel, I am afraid that didnt solve my problem. I was guessing my problem was that I have too much of data and too little memory allocated for that. I happened to read in couple of the posts which mentioned that I need VM that is close to the size of my data(folder). I have like 540 Megs now and a little more than a million and a half docs. Ideally in that case 512 megs should be enough for me. In fact I am able to perform all other operations now, commit, optmize, select, update, nightly cron jobs to index data again. etc etc with no hassles. Even my load tests perform very well. Just the sort and it doesnt seem to work. I allocated 2 gigs of memory now. Still same results. Used the GC params u gave me too. No change what so ever. Am not sure, whats going on. Is there something that I can do to find out how much is needed in actuality as my production server might need to be configured in accordance. I dont store any documents. We basically fetch standard column data from oracle database store them into Solr fields. Before I had EdgeNGram configured and had Solr 1.2, My data size was less that half of what it is right now. I guess if I remember right, it was of the order of 100 megs. The max size of a field right now might not cross a 100 chars too. Quizzled even more now. -Sundar P.S: My configurations : Solr 1.3 Red hat 540 megs of data (1855013 docs) 2 gigs of memory installed and allocated like this JAVA_OPTS=$JAVA_OPTS -Xms2048m -Xmx2048m -XX:MinHeapFreeRatio=50 -XX:NewSize=1024m -XX:NewRatio=2 -Dsun.rmi.dgc.client.gcInterval=360 -Dsun.rmi.dgc.server.gcInterval=360 Jboss 4.05 Subject: RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:49:06 +0100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Hi I haven't read the whole thread so I will take my chances here. I've been fighting recently to keep my Solr instances stable because they were frequently crashing with OutOfMemoryErrors. I'm using Solr 1.2 and when it happens there is a bug that makes the index locked unless you restart Solr... So in my cenario it was extremelly damaging. After some profiling I realized that my major problem was caused by the way the JVM heap was being used as I haven't configured it to run using any advanced configuration (I had just made it bigger -Xmx and Xms 1.5 Gb), it's running on Sun JVM 1.5 (the most recent1.5 available) and it's deployed
RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting
Hi Sundar, If increasing LRU cache helps you: - you are probably using 'tokenized' field for sorting (could you confirm please?)... ...you should use 'non-tokenized single-valued non-boolean' for better performance of sorting... Fuad Efendi == http://www.tokenizer.org Quoting sundar shankar [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi all, I seemed to have found the solution to this problem. Apparently, allocating enough virtual memory on the server seems to only solve on half of the problem. Even after allocating 4 gigs of Virtual memory on jboss server, I still did get the Out of memory on sorting. I didn't how ever notice that the LRU cache on my config was set to default which was still 512 megs of max memory. I had to increase that to a round 2 gigs and the sorting did work perfectly ok. Even though I am satisfied that I have found the solution to the problem, i am still not satisfied to know that Sort consumes so much memory. In no products have I seen sorting 10 fields take up 1 gig and half of virtual memory. I am not sure, if there could be a better implementation of this. But something doesn't seem right to me. Thanks for all your support. It has truly been overwhelming. Sundar
RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting
The field is of type text_ws. Is this not recomended. Should I use text instead? Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 10:58:35 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting Hi Sundar, If increasing LRU cache helps you: - you are probably using 'tokenized' field for sorting (could you confirm please?)... ...you should use 'non-tokenized single-valued non-boolean' for better performance of sorting... Fuad Efendi == http://www.tokenizer.org Quoting sundar shankar [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi all, I seemed to have found the solution to this problem. Apparently, allocating enough virtual memory on the server seems to only solve on half of the problem. Even after allocating 4 gigs of Virtual memory on jboss server, I still did get the Out of memory on sorting. I didn't how ever notice that the LRU cache on my config was set to default which was still 512 megs of max memory. I had to increase that to a round 2 gigs and the sorting did work perfectly ok. Even though I am satisfied that I have found the solution to the problem, i am still not satisfied to know that Sort consumes so much memory. In no products have I seen sorting 10 fields take up 1 gig and half of virtual memory. I am not sure, if there could be a better implementation of this. But something doesn't seem right to me. Thanks for all your support. It has truly been overwhelming. Sundar Movies, sports news! Get your daily entertainment fix, only on live.com Try it now! _ Searching for the best deals on travel? Visit MSN Travel. http://msn.coxandkings.co.in/cnk/cnk.do
RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting
My understanding of Lucene Sorting is that it will sort by 'tokens' and not by 'full fields'... so that for sorting you need 'full-string' (non-tokenized) field, and to search you need another one tokenized. For instance, use 'string' for sorting, and 'text_ws' for search; and use 'copyField'... (some memory for copyField) Sorting using tokenized field: 100,000 documents, each 'Book Title' consists of 10 tokens in average, ... - total 1,000,000 (probably unique) tokens in a hashtable; with nontokenized field - 100,000 entries, and Lucene internal FieldCache is used instead of SOLR LRU. Also, with tokenized fields 'sorting' is not natural (alphabetical order)... Fuad Efendi == http://www.linkedin.com/in/liferay Quoting sundar shankar [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The field is of type text_ws. Is this not recomended. Should I use text instead? If increasing LRU cache helps you: - you are probably using 'tokenized' field for sorting (could you confirm please?)... ...you should use 'non-tokenized single-valued non-boolean' for better performance of sorting...
RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting
Best choice for sorting field: !-- This is an example of using the KeywordTokenizer along With various TokenFilterFactories to produce a sortable field that does not include some properties of the source text -- fieldType name=alphaOnlySort class=solr.TextField sortMissingLast=true omitNorms=true - case-insentitive etc... I might be partially wrong about SOLR LRU Cache but it is used somehow in your specific case... 'filterCache' is probably used for 'tokenized' sorting: it stores (token, DocList)... Fuad Efendi == http://www.tokenizer.org Quoting Fuad Efendi [EMAIL PROTECTED]: My understanding of Lucene Sorting is that it will sort by 'tokens' and not by 'full fields'... so that for sorting you need 'full-string' (non-tokenized) field, and to search you need another one tokenized. For instance, use 'string' for sorting, and 'text_ws' for search; and use 'copyField'... (some memory for copyField) Sorting using tokenized field: 100,000 documents, each 'Book Title' consists of 10 tokens in average, ... - total 1,000,000 (probably unique) tokens in a hashtable; with nontokenized field - 100,000 entries, and Lucene internal FieldCache is used instead of SOLR LRU. Also, with tokenized fields 'sorting' is not natural (alphabetical order)... Fuad Efendi == http://www.linkedin.com/in/liferay Quoting sundar shankar [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The field is of type text_ws. Is this not recomended. Should I use text instead? If increasing LRU cache helps you: - you are probably using 'tokenized' field for sorting (could you confirm please?)... ...you should use 'non-tokenized single-valued non-boolean' for better performance of sorting...
Re: Solr Logo thought
My issue with the logos presented was they made solr look like a
school project instead of the powerful tool that it is. The tricked
out font or whatever just usually doesn't play well with the business
types... they want serious-looking software. First impressions are
everything. While the fiery colors are appropriate for something
named Solr, you can play with that without getting silly - take a look
at:
http://www.ascsolar.com/images/asc_solar_splash_logo.gif
http://www.logostick.com/images/EOS_InvestmentingLogo_lg.gif
(Luckily there are many businesses that do solar energy!)
They have the same elements but with a certain simplicity and elegance.
I know probably some people don't care if it makes the boss or client
happy, but, these are the kinds of seemingly insignificant things that
make people choose a bad, proprietary piece of junk over something
solid and open-source... it's all about appearances! The people
making the decision often have little else to go on, unfortunately.
--
Steve
On Aug 5, 2008, at 3:45 PM, Lukáš Vlček wrote:
Hi,
I would like to give it a shot. Are there any solr logo success
criteria/requirements? Any hints or suggestions from community is
welcomed.
Just close your eyes, start dreaming and send my couple of words
about what
you see... I am all ears.
Also I found that the wiki mentions some
genesishttp://wiki.apache.org/solr/FAQ#head-6d74c2bb4171b0908a4695cbb24acd368a29dc06
of
Solar/Solr technology but still I don't understand if the relation to
sun
is intentional or coincidence.
Regards,
Lukas
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:08 AM, Norberto Meijome
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Mon, 4 Aug 2008 09:29:30 -0700
Ryan McKinley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If there is a still room for new log design for Solr and the
community is
open for it then I can try to come up with some proposal. Doing
logo
for
Mahout was really interesting experience.
In my opinion, yes I'd love to see more effort put towards the
logo. I have stayed out of this discussion since I don't really
think
any of the logos under consideration are complete. (I begged some
friends to do two of the three logos under consideration) I would
love to refine them, but time... oooh time.
+1
If we are going to change what we have, i'd love to see some more
options ,
or
better quality - no offence meant , but those logos aren't really
a huge
improvement or departure from the current one.
I think whatever we change to we'll be wanting to use it for a long
time.
B
_
{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome
If you find a solution and become attached to it, the solution may
become
your
next problem.
I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery
when
wet.
Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You
have
been
Warned.
--
http://blog.lukas-vlcek.com/
Re: Out of memory on Solr sorting
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Fuad Efendi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If increasing LRU cache helps you: - you are probably using 'tokenized' field for sorting (could you confirm please?)... Sorting does not utilize any Solr caches. -Yonik
Re: multivaluefield and order
Yes. On 8/5/08 4:58 PM, Ian Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, When you store a multivaluefield in a given order ['one','two','three','four'], will it always return the values in that order?
Re: Out of memory on Solr sorting
I know, and this is strange... I was guessing filterCache is used implicitly to get DocSet for token; as Sundar wrote, increase of LRUCache helped him (he is sorting on 'text-ws' field) -Fuad If increasing LRU cache helps you: - you are probably using 'tokenized' field for sorting (could you confirm please?)... Sorting does not utilize any Solr caches. -Yonik
RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting
Yes this is what I did. I got an out of memory while executing a query with a sort param 1. Stopped Jboss server 2. filterCache class=solr.LRUCache size=2048 initialSize=512 autowarmCount=256/ !-- queryResultCache caches results of searches - ordered lists of document ids (DocList) based on a query, a sort, and the range of documents requested. --queryResultCache class=solr.LRUCache size=2048 initialSize=512 autowarmCount=256/ !-- documentCache caches Lucene Document objects (the stored fields for each document). Since Lucene internal document ids are transient, this cache will not be autowarmed. --documentCache class=solr.LRUCache size=2048 initialSize=512 autowarmCount=0/ In these 3 params, I changed size from 512 to 2048. 3. Restarted the server 4. Ran query again. It worked just fine. after that. I am currently reinexing, replaving the text_ws to string and having the default size of all 3 caches to 512 and seeing if the problem goes away. -Sundar Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 14:05:05 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Out of memory on Solr sorting I know, and this is strange... I was guessing filterCache is used implicitly to get DocSet for token; as Sundar wrote, increase of LRUCache helped him (he is sorting on 'text-ws' field) -Fuad If increasing LRU cache helps you: - you are probably using 'tokenized' field for sorting (could you confirm please?)... Sorting does not utilize any Solr caches. -Yonik _ Searching for the best deals on travel? Visit MSN Travel. http://msn.coxandkings.co.in/cnk/cnk.do
Re: multivaluefield and order
Thanks for the quick reply. I was searching for multivalue field, multi value, order and positon and didn't find the answer. However, with this little bit of keyword loading, the next person to search will be all good. Order IS conserved when storing mutivalued fields in solr and lucene. On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Smiley, David W. (DSMILEY) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes. On 8/5/08 4:58 PM, Ian Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, When you store a multivaluefield in a given order ['one','two','three','four'], will it always return the values in that order? -- Regards, Ian Connor
Re: Indexing time boosts on particular field
I think you want to boost specific clauses at *search* time, not index time. Something like adding a clause +CourseType:MATHMATICS^10 Best Erick On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Vicky_Dev [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Hi Requirement: For given document , if course type = MATHMATICS then search results contains Course type MATHMATICS documents then show search results should show Course type MATHMATICS documents prior than any other documents. Course Type will be one of the field whist creating solr index I have went through Index-time boost documentation. It is saying: An Index-time boost on a value of a multiValued field applies to all values for that field and not on individual values. Is there any way to boost Course type MATHMATICS documents at index time? Thanks in advance ~Vikrant -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Indexing-time-boosts-on-particular-field-tp18839400p18839400.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting
Sundar, very strange that increase of size/initialSize of LRUCache helps with OutOfMemoryError... 2048 is number of entries in cache and _not_ 2Gb of memory... Making size==initialSize of HashMap-based LRUCache would help with performance anyway; may be with OOMs (probably no need to resize HashMap...) In these 3 params, I changed size from 512 to 2048. 3. Restarted the server sorting I know, and this is strange... I was guessing filterCache is used implicitly to get DocSet for token; as Sundar wrote, increase of LRUCache helped him (he is sorting on 'text-ws' field) -Fuad If increasing LRU cache helps you: - you are probably using 'tokenized' field for sorting (could you confirm please?)... Sorting does not utilize any Solr caches. -Yonik _ Searching for the best deals on travel? Visit MSN Travel. http://msn.coxandkings.co.in/cnk/cnk.do
config reload JMX capabilities
One of the requirements we have is that when we deploy new data for solr config (synonyms, dictionary etc) we should NOT be restarting the solr instances for the changes to take effect. Are there ConfigReload capabilities through JMX that can help us do this? Thanks in Advance -Raghu
RE: Diagnostic tools
Yes we are sending the commits. -Raghu -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yonik Seeley Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 12:01 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Diagnostic tools On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Kashyap, Raghu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are there are tools that are available to view the indexing process? We have a cron process which posts XML files to the solr index server. However, we are NOT seeing the documents posted correctly and we are also NOT getting any errors from the client You need to send a commit before index changes become visible. -Yonik
RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting
Oh Wow, I didnt know that was the case. I am completely left baffled now. BAck to square one I guess. :) Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 14:31:28 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: Out of memory on Solr sorting Sundar, very strange that increase of size/initialSize of LRUCache helps with OutOfMemoryError... 2048 is number of entries in cache and _not_ 2Gb of memory... Making size==initialSize of HashMap-based LRUCache would help with performance anyway; may be with OOMs (probably no need to resize HashMap...) In these 3 params, I changed size from 512 to 2048. 3. Restarted the server sorting I know, and this is strange... I was guessing filterCache is used implicitly to get DocSet for token; as Sundar wrote, increase of LRUCache helped him (he is sorting on 'text-ws' field) -Fuad If increasing LRU cache helps you:- you are probably using 'tokenized' field for sorting (could you confirm please?)... Sorting does not utilize any Solr caches. -Yonik _ Searching for the best deals on travel? Visit MSN Travel. http://msn.coxandkings.co.in/cnk/cnk.do _ Searching for the best deals on travel? Visit MSN Travel. http://msn.coxandkings.co.in/cnk/cnk.do
Re: Sum of one field
Hello, Otis! I believe the best approach would be hacking the SolrIndexSearcher in our case. Let me explain further what we want to know with a Car ad website example. Imagine that you have a website called CarStores and that you let people search by brand, sorting by price etc. So I'm looking for a Ferrari. CarStore says that there are 5 ads for Ferrari, but one ad has 2 Ferraris being sold, the other ad has 3 Ferraris and all the others have 1 Ferrari each, meaning that there are 5 ads and 8 Ferraris. And yes, I'm doing an example with Fibonacci numbers. ;) Since I believe this could be a solution not only for us, maybe it's a simple feature SOLR could have embedded in its code base. If you guys think this is a good idea, please let me know. I believe it would be very useful to let people understand what are they finding when they search. Best, Leonardo. Otis Gospodnetic escreveu: Leonardo, You'd have to read that quantity fields for all matching documents one way or the other. One way is by getting all results and pulling that field out, so you can get the sum.. Another way is to hack the SolrIndexSearcher and get this value in one of the HitCollector collect method calls. Another possibility, if your index is fairly static, might be to read it all documents' (not just matches') quantity field and store that in a docID-quantity map structure that lets you look up quantity for any docID you want. There may be other/better ways of doing this, but this is what comes to (my) mind first. Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch - Original Message From: Leonardo Dias [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Monday, August 4, 2008 1:19:45 PM Subject: Sum of one field Everyone exhibits your search for x has returned y results on the top of the results page, but we need something else, which would be something like your search for x returned y results in z records, being z the numdocs of the SOLR response and y a SUM(quantity) of all returned records. In SQL you can do something like: SELECT count(1), sum(quantity) FROM table But with SOLR we don't know how can we do the same without having to return all the XML result for the field quantity and then sum it to show the total. Any hints on how to do it in a better way? cheers, Leonardo
Re: Unlock on startup
Try: lockTypesingle/lockType Koji sundar shankar wrote: Hi All, I am having to test solr indexing quite a bit on my local and dev environments. I had the unlockOnStartuptrue/unlockOnStartup. But restarting my server still doesn't seem to remove the writelock file. Is there some other configuration that I might have to do get this fixed. My Configurations : Solr 1.3 on Windows xp(local) and RHL on dev box. Jboss 4.05 Regards Sundar _ Searching for the best deals on travel? Visit MSN Travel. http://msn.coxandkings.co.in/cnk/cnk.do
Re: Diagnostic tools
On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 11:43:44 -0500
Kashyap, Raghu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Hi Kashyap,
please don't hijack topic threads.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_hijacking
thanks!!
B
_
{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome
Software QA is like cleaning my cat's litter box: Sift out the big chunks. Stir
in the rest. Hope it doesn't stink.
I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery when wet.
Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You have been
Warned.
Re: unique key
On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 14:41:08 -0300
Scott Swan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I currently have multiple documents that i would like to index but i would
like to combine two fields to produce the unique key.
the documents either have 1 or the other fields so by combining the two
fields i will get a unique result.
is this possible in the solr schema?
Hi Scott,
you can't do that by the schema - you need to do it when you generate your
document, before posting it to SOLR.
btw, please don't hijack topic threads.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_hijacking
thanks!!
B
_
{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome
Law of Conservation of Perversity:
we can't make something simpler without making something else more complex
I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery when wet.
Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You have been
Warned.
Re: Sum of one field
On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 18:58:42 -0300
Leonardo Dias [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I'm looking for a Ferrari. CarStore says that there are 5 ads for
Ferrari, but one ad has 2 Ferraris being sold, the other ad has 3
Ferraris and all the others have 1 Ferrari each, meaning that there are
5 ads and 8 Ferraris. And yes, I'm doing an example with Fibonacci
numbers. ;)
why not create one separate document per car? It'll make it easier (for the
client) to manage too when one of the cars is sold but not the other 4
B
_
{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a
good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be
dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead.
[RFC1925 - section 2, subsection 3]
I speak for myself, not my employer. Contents may be hot. Slippery when wet.
Reading disclaimers makes you go blind. Writing them is worse. You have been
Warned.
Re: config reload JMX capabilities
On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 3:09 AM, Kashyap, Raghu [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Are there ConfigReload capabilities through JMX that can help us do this? No, only statistics are exposed through JMX at present. SOLR-561 enables support for automatic config file replication to slaves without downtime. However, a lot of work is left in that. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-561 -- Regards, Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
