How to set default query operator in surround query parser?
Hi, all I'm using surround query parser. The request A B returns ParseException. But A OR B returns correct results. I think this is the problem of default query operator. Anyone know how to set? Thanks, Jason -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/How-to-set-default-query-operator-in-surround-query-parser-tp3570034p3570034.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
is there a way using 1.4 index at 4.0 trunk?
Hello, I'm using solr 1.4 version. I want to use some plugin in trunk version. But I got IndexFormatTooOldException when it run old version index at trunk. Is there a way using 1.4 index at 4.0 trunk? Thanks, Jason -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/is-there-a-way-using-1-4-index-at-4-0-trunk-tp3550430p3550430.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
appling SurroundQParserPlugin
Hi all Is it possible to use SurroundQParserPlugin in Solr 1.4.0? if so, how shoud I do it? Thank in advance Jason -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/appling-SurroundQParserPlugin-tp3540283p3540283.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
server down caused by complex query
Hi all Nowadays our solr server is frequently down. Because our user send very long and complex queries with asterisk and near operator. Sometimes near operator exceeds 1,000 and keywords almost include asterisk. If such query is sent to server, jvm memory is full. (our jvm memory allocates 110G.) After that, server is like down. We also have old version's k2 engine. But k2 is not down for same query. k2 uses more i/o than memory. Could we control solr memory usage? Or is there any other solution? (we are using solr1.4) Thanks in advance. Jason -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/server-down-caused-by-complex-query-tp3535506p3535506.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
abort processing query
Hi all We have very complexed queries including wildcard. That causes memory overhead. Sometimes, memory is full and server doesn't response. What I wonder, when query process time on server exceeds the time limit, can I abort processing query? If possible, how should I do? Thanks in advance Jason -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/abort-processing-query-tp3495876p3495876.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Question about near query order
Which one is better performance of setting inOrder=false in solrconfig.xml and quering with A B~1 AND B A~1 if performance differences? -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Question-about-near-query-order-tp3427312p3437701.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Question about near query order
Thank you for your kind reply. Is it possible only defType=lucnee in your second suggestion? I'm using ComplexPhraseQueryParser. So my defType is complexphrase. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Question-about-near-query-order-tp3427312p3431465.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Question about near query order
Thanks a ton iorixxx. Jason. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Question-about-near-query-order-tp3427312p3432922.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Question about near query order
analyze term~2 term analyze~2 In my case, two queries return different result set. Isn't that in your case? -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Question-about-near-query-order-tp3427312p3429916.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Question about near query order
Hi, all I have some near query like analyze term~2. That is matched in that order. But I want to search regardless of order. So far, I just queried analyze term~2 OR term analyze~2. Is there a better way than what i did? Thanks in advance. Jason. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Question-about-near-query-order-tp3427312p3427312.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Phrase search error
Hi, all When I queried a phrase search test mp3, I got some error below. I think that the problem is because of WordDelimiterFilter. In WordDelimiterFilter 'mp3' is splited pos1:mp, pos2:(3, mp3). In such a case, the positions of subword and catenateword are incremented. If this is not phrase search or WordDelimiterFilterFactory options just set catenateAll=1, no problems. But If WordDelimiterFilterFactory options set like below 'My Schema.xml', occured error. How can I solve this problem? Give me any idea. Thanks in advance. Jason [Error Message] == Unknown query type org.apache.lucene.search.MultiPhraseQuery found in phrase query string test mp3 java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Unknown query type org.apache.lucene.search.MultiPhraseQuery found in phrase query string test mp3 at org.apache.lucene.queryParser.ComplexPhraseQueryParser$ComplexPhraseQuery.rewrite(ComplexPhraseQueryParser.java:300) at org.apache.lucene.search.IndexSearcher.rewrite(IndexSearcher.java:307) at org.apache.lucene.search.Query.weight(Query.java:98) at org.apache.lucene.search.Searcher.createWeight(Searcher.java:230) at org.apache.lucene.search.Searcher.search(Searcher.java:171) at org.apache.solr.search.SolrIndexSearcher.getDocListNC(SolrIndexSearcher.java:988) at org.apache.solr.search.SolrIndexSearcher.getDocListC(SolrIndexSearcher.java:884) at org.apache.solr.search.SolrIndexSearcher.search(SolrIndexSearcher.java:341) at org.apache.solr.handler.component.QueryComponent.process(QueryComponent.java:182) at org.apache.solr.handler.component.SearchHandler.handleRequestBody(SearchHandler.java:195) at org.apache.solr.handler.RequestHandlerBase.handleRequest(RequestHandlerBase.java:131) at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.execute(SolrCore.java:1316) at org.apache.solr.servlet.SolrDispatchFilter.execute(SolrDispatchFilter.java:341) at org.apache.solr.servlet.SolrDispatchFilter.doFilter(SolrDispatchFilter.java:244) at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler$CachedChain.doFilter(ServletHandler.java:1089) at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.handle(ServletHandler.java:365) at org.mortbay.jetty.security.SecurityHandler.handle(SecurityHandler.java:216) at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.SessionHandler.handle(SessionHandler.java:181) at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.ContextHandler.handle(ContextHandler.java:712) at org.mortbay.jetty.webapp.WebAppContext.handle(WebAppContext.java:405) at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.ContextHandlerCollection.handle(ContextHandlerCollection.java:211) at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.HandlerCollection.handle(HandlerCollection.java:114) at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.HandlerWrapper.handle(HandlerWrapper.java:139) at org.mortbay.jetty.Server.handle(Server.java:285) at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection.handleRequest(HttpConnection.java:502) at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection$RequestHandler.headerComplete(HttpConnection.java:821) at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpParser.parseNext(HttpParser.java:513) at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpParser.parseAvailable(HttpParser.java:208) at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection.handle(HttpConnection.java:378) at org.mortbay.jetty.bio.SocketConnector$Connection.run(SocketConnector.java:226) at org.mortbay.thread.BoundedThreadPool$PoolThread.run(BoundedThreadPool.java:442) == [My Schema.xml] == fieldType name=text class=solr.TextField positionIncrementGap=100 analyzer type=index charFilter class=solr.MappingCharFilterFactory mapping=mapping-FoldToASCII.txt / tokenizer class=solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory/ filter class=solr.StopFilterFactory ignoreCase=true words=stopwords.txt enablePositionIncrements=true / filter class=solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory generateWordParts=1 generateNumberParts=0 catenateWords=1 catenateNumbers=1 catenateAll=1 splitOnCaseChange=1 / filter class=solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory / filter class=solr.SnowballPorterWithUnstemFilterFactory language=English protected=protwords.txt / /analyzer analyzer type=query tokenizer class=solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory/ filter class=solr.StopFilterFactory ignoreCase=true words=stopwords.txt enablePositionIncrements=true / filter class=solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory generateWordParts=1 generateNumberParts=0 catenateWords=1 catenateNumbers=1 catenateAll=1 splitOnCaseChange=0 / filter class=solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory / filter class=solr.SnowballPorterFilterFactory language=English protected=protwords.txt / /analyzer /fieldType
Re: Phrase search error
Hi, Ludovic That's just what I'm looking for. You're been a big help. Thank you so much. Jason. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Phrase-search-error-tp3423799p3423916.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
how to improve query result time.
Hi All I have complex phrase queries including wildcard. (ex. q=conn* pho*~2 OR inter* pho*~2 OR ...) That takes long query result time. I tried reindex after changing termIndexInterval to 8 for reduce the query result time through more loading term index info. I thought if I do so query result time will be faster. But it wasn't. I doubt searching for .frq/.prx spends more time... Any ideas for impoving query result time? I'm using Solr 1.4 and schema.xml is below. fieldType name=text class=solr.TextField positionIncrementGap=100 analyzer type=index tokenizer class=solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory/ filter class=solr.StopFilterFactory ignoreCase=true words=stopwords.txt enablePositionIncrements=true / filter class=solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory generateWordParts=1 generateNumberParts=1 catenateWords=1 catenateNumbers=1 catenateAll=1 splitOnCaseChange=1 / filter class=solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory / filter class=solr.SnowballPorterWithUnstemFilterFactory language=English protected=protwords.txt / /analyzer analyzer type=query tokenizer class=solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory/ filter class=solr.StopFilterFactory ignoreCase=true words=stopwords.txt enablePositionIncrements=true / filter class=solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory generateWordParts=1 generateNumberParts=1 catenateWords=0 catenateNumbers=0 catenateAll=0 splitOnCaseChange=1 / filter class=solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory / filter class=solr.SnowballPorterFilterFactory language=English protected=protwords.txt / /analyzer /fieldType Thanks in advance -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-to-improve-query-result-time-tp3136554p3136554.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
SolrDocumentList in Distributed search
Hi All I have 5 shards. (sh01 ~ sh05) I was debugging using solrJ. When I quiried at each shard, results are right. But when I quiried at all shards, elementData of SolrDocumentList is null. But numFound of SolrDocumentList is right. How can I get the SolrDocumentList in shards? Thanks in Advance -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SolrDocumentList-in-Distributed-search-tp3112580p3112580.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: why too many open files?
Hi, Mark I think FileNotFoundException will be worked around by raise the ulimit. I just want to know why segments are created more than mergeFactor. During the googling, I found contents concerning mergeFactor: http://web.archiveorange.com/archive/v/bH0vUQzfYcdtZoocG2C9 Yonik wrote: mergeFactor 10 means a maximum of 10 segments at each level. if maxBufferedDocs=10 with a log doc merge policy (equivalent to Lucene in the old days), then you could have up to ~ 10*log10(nDocs) segments in the index (i.e. up to 60 segments for a 1M doc index). But I don't understand this. someone explain to me in more detail? Thanks -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/why-too-many-open-files-tp3084407p3085172.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
why too many open files?
Hi, All I have 12 shards and ramBufferSizeMB=512, mergeFactor=5. But solr raise java.io.FileNotFoundException (Too many open files). mergeFactor is just 5. How can this happen? Below is segments of some shard. That is too many segments over mergFactor. What's wrong and How should I set the mergeFactor? == [root@solr solr]# ls indexData/multicore-us/usn02/data/index/ _0.fdt _gs.fdt _h5.tii _hl.nrm _i1.nrm _kn.nrm _l1.nrm _lq.tii _0.fdx _gs.fdx _h5.tis _hl.prx _i1.prx _kn.prx _l1.prx _lq.tis _3i.fdt _gs.fnm _h7.fnm _hl.tii _i1.tii _kn.tii _l1.tii lucene-2de7b31b5eabdff0b6ec7fd32eecf8c7-write.lock _3i.fdx _gs.frq _h7.frq _hl.tis _i1.tis _kn.tis _l1.tis _lu.fnm _3s.fnm _gs.nrm _h7.nrm _hn.fnm _j7.fdt _kp.fnm _l2.fnm _lu.frq _3s.frq _gs.prx _h7.prx _hn.frq _j7.fdx _kp.frq _l2.frq _lu.nrm _3s.nrm _gs.tii _h7.tii _hn.nrm _kb.fnm _kp.nrm _l2.nrm _lu.prx _3s.prx _gs.tis _h7.tis _hn.prx _kb.frq _kp.prx _l2.prx _lu.tii _3s.tii _gu.fnm _h9.fnm _hn.tii _kb.nrm _kp.tii _l2.tii _lu.tis _3s.tis _gu.frq _h9.frq _hn.tis _kb.prx _kp.tis _l2.tis _ly.fnm _48.fdt _gu.nrm _h9.nrm _hp.fnm _kb.tii _kq.fnm _l6.fnm _ly.frq _48.fdx _gu.prx _h9.prx _hp.frq _kb.tis _kq.frq _l6.frq _ly.nrm _4d.fnm _gu.tii _h9.tii _hp.nrm _kc.fnm _kq.nrm _l6.nrm _ly.prx _4d.frq _gu.tis _h9.tis _hp.prx _kc.frq _kq.prx _l6.prx _ly.tii _4d.nrm _gw.fnm _hb.fnm _hp.tii _kc.nrm _kq.tii _l6.tii _ly.tis _4d.prx _gw.frq _hb.frq _hp.tis _kc.prx _kq.tis _l6.tis _m3.fnm _4d.tii _gw.nrm _hb.nrm _hr.fnm _kc.tii _kr.fnm _la.fnm _m3.frq _4d.tis _gw.prx _hb.prx _hr.frq _kc.tis _kr.frq _la.frq _m3.nrm _5b.fdt _gw.tii _hb.tii _hr.nrm _kf.fdt _kr.nrm _la.nrm _m3.prx _5b.fdx _gw.tis _hb.tis _hr.prx _kf.fdx _kr.prx _la.prx _m3.tii _5b.fnm _gy.fnm _he.fdt _hr.tii _kf.fnm _kr.tii _la.tii _m3.tis _5b.frq _gy.frq _he.fdx _hr.tis _kf.frq _kr.tis _la.tis _m8.fnm _5b.nrm _gy.nrm _he.fnm _ht.fnm _kf.nrm _kt.fnm _le.fnm _m8.frq _5b.prx _gy.prx _he.frq _ht.frq _kf.prx _kt.frq _le.frq _m8.nrm _5b.tii _gy.tii _he.nrm _ht.nrm _kf.tii _kt.nrm _le.nrm _m8.prx _5b.tis _gy.tis _he.prx _ht.prx _kf.tis _kt.prx _le.prx _m8.tii _5m.fnm _h0.fnm _he.tii _ht.tii _kg.fnm _kt.tii _le.tii _m8.tis _5m.frq _h0.frq _he.tis _ht.tis _kg.frq _kt.tis _le.tis _md.fnm _5m.nrm _h0.nrm _hh.fnm _hv.fnm _kg.nrm _kw.fnm _li.fnm _md.frq _5m.prx _h0.prx _hh.frq _hv.frq _kg.prx _kw.frq _li.frq _md.nrm _5m.tii _h0.tii _hh.nrm _hv.nrm _kg.tii _kw.nrm _li.nrm _md.prx _5m.tis _h0.tis _hh.prx _hv.prx _kg.tis _kw.prx _li.prx _md.tii _5n.fnm _h2.fnm _hh.tii _hv.tii _kj.fdt _kw.tii _li.tii _md.tis _5n.frq _h2.frq _hh.tis _hv.tis _kj.fdx _kw.tis _li.tis _mi.fnm _5n.nrm _h2.nrm _hk.fnm _hz.fdt _kj.fnm _ky.fnm _lm.fnm _mi.frq _5n.prx _h2.prx _hk.frq _hz.fdx _kj.frq _ky.frq _lm.frq _mi.nrm _5n.tii _h2.tii _hk.nrm _hz.fnm _kj.nrm _ky.nrm _lm.nrm _mi.prx _5n.tis _h2.tis _hk.prx _hz.frq _kj.prx _ky.prx _lm.prx _mi.tii _5x.fnm _h5.fdt _hk.tii _hz.nrm _kj.tii _ky.tii _lm.tii _mi.tis _5x.frq _h5.fdx _hk.tis _hz.prx _kj.tis _ky.tis _lm.tis segments_1 _5x.nrm _h5.fnm _hl.fdt _hz.tii _kn.fdt _l1.fdt _lq.fnm segments.gen _5x.prx _h5.frq _hl.fdx _hz.tis _kn.fdx _l1.fdx _lq.frq _5x.tii _h5.nrm _hl.fnm _i1.fnm _kn.fnm _l1.fnm _lq.nrm _5x.tis _h5.prx _hl.frq _i1.frq _kn.frq _l1.frq _lq.prx == Thanks in advance. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/why-too-many-open-files-tp3084407p3084407.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
disable sort by score
Hi, All I want to get the search result which is not sorted by anything. Sorting by score take more time. So, I want to disable sorting by score. How can i do this? Thanks, Jason. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/disable-sort-by-score-tp3057767p3057767.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: disable sort by score
Thanks to reply, Erick! Actually, I need sort by score. I was just curious that seach result without sorting is possible. Then I found http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/MaxRows-and-disabling-sort-td2260650.html In above context, Chris Hostetter-3 wrote ++ http://wiki.apache.org/solr/CommonQueryParameters#sort You can sort by index id using sort=_docid_ asc or sort=_docid_ desc if you specify _docid_ asc then solr should return as soon as it finds the first N matching results w/o scoring all docs (because no score will be computed) ++ I tried to check perfomance using _docid_ asc. But _docid_ didn't work in distributed search. So I made inquiries to know that another method is. Best Jason -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/disable-sort-by-score-tp3057767p3061753.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
how to work cache and improve performance phrase query included wildcard
Hi, all I have two questions. First, I'm wondering how filterCache, queryResultCache, documentCache are applied. After searching query1 OR query2 OR query3 ... , I searched query0 OR query2 OR query3 ... . Just query1 and query0 are difference. But query time was not fast. When are the caches applied? Second, I have 5 or more phrase queries included wildcard per query such as query1* query2*~2 OR query3* query4*~2 ... In the worst case, phrase queries included wildcard in one query are more than 30. QTime is more than 60 second. Please give any idea to improve performance. I have 2.5 million full text index. That is running 10 shards on 1 tomcat. Thanks, Jason -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-to-work-cache-and-improve-performance-phrase-query-included-wildcard-tp2956671p2956671.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
search problem after using EdgeNGramFilter
I am using EdgeNGramFilter for wildcard search. But the search result is same whether or not followed by asterisk. When I search without asterisk, I just want to retrive in original terms(except ngram terms). [example] - doc1 : enterprise search server - doc2 : enter key When I query 'enter*', both doc1 and doc2 are retrived. It's ok. When I query 'enter', both doc1 and doc2 are also retrived. But I just want a doc2. How should I do this? please help! -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/search-problem-after-using-EdgeNGramFilter-tp2060966p2060966.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: search problem after using EdgeNGramFilter
Hi, iorixxx I thought that I have to use NGramFilter for wildcard search. But It was the wrong idea. Thanks, iorixxx -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/search-problem-after-using-EdgeNGramFilter-tp2060966p2061961.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Using Ngram and Phrase search
Hi, all I want to use both EdegeNGram analysis and phrase search. But there is some problem. On Field which is not using EdgeNGram analysis, phrase search.is good work. But if using EdgeNGram then phrase search is incorrect. Now I'm using Solr1.4.0. Result of EdgeNGram analysis for pci express is below. http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/file/n1986848/before.jpg I thought cause is term position. So I modified EdgeNGramTokenFilter of lucene-analyzers-2.9.1. After modified, result is below. http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/file/n1986848/after.jpg So phrase search fot pci express from ngram index is good work. But another problem is happend. For example, when I searh phrase query pc express, docs included 'pci express' are searched too. In this case I don't want to search for 'pci express'. I just want exact match pc express. Please give your ideas. Thanks, -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Using-Ngram-and-Phrase-search-tp1986848p1986848.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: how can i use solrj binary format for indexing?
Hi Gora, I really appreciate. Your reply was a great help to me. :) I hope everything is fine with you. Regards, Jason Gora Mohanty-3 wrote: On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Jason, Kim hialo...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry for the delay in replying. Was caught up in various things this week. Thank you for reply, Gora But I still have several questions. Did you use separate index? If so, you indexed 0.7 million Xml files per instance and merged it. Is it Right? Yes, that is correct. We sharded the data by user ID, so that each of the 25 cores held approximately 0.7 million out of the 3.5 million records. We could have used the sharded indices directly for search, but at least for now have decided to go with a single, merged index. Please let me know how to work multiple instances and cores in your case. [...] * Multi-core Solr setup is quite easy, via configuration in solr.xml: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/CoreAdmin . The configuration, i.e., schema, solrconfig.xml, etc. need to be replicated across the cores. * Decide which XML files you will post to which core, and do the POST with curl, as usual. You might need to write a little script to do this. * After indexing on the cores is done, make sure to do a commit on each. * Merge the sharded indexes (if desired) as described here: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/MergingSolrIndexes . One thing to watch out for here is disk space. When merging with Lucene IndexMergeTool, we found that a rough rule of thumb was that intermediate steps in the merge would require about twice as much space as the total size of the indexes to be merged. I.e., if one is merging 40GB of data in sharded indexes, one should have at least 120GB free. Regards, Gora -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-can-i-use-solrj-binary-format-for-indexing-tp1722612p1750669.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: how can i use solrj binary format for indexing?
Hi, Gora I haven't tried yet indexing huge amount of xml files through curl or pure java(like a post.jar). Indexing through xml is really fast? How many files did you index? And How did it(using curl or pure java)? Thanks, Gora -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-can-i-use-solrj-binary-format-for-indexing-tp1722612p1724645.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: how can i use solrj binary format for indexing?
Thank you for reply, Gora But I still have several questions. Did you use separate index? If so, you indexed 0.7 million Xml files per instance and merged it. Is it Right? Please let me know how to work multiple instances and cores in your case. Regards, -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-can-i-use-solrj-binary-format-for-indexing-tp1722612p1725679.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
how can i use solrj binary format for indexing?
Hi all I have a huge amount of xml files for indexing. I want to index using solrj binary format to get performance gain. Because I heard that using xml files to index is quite slow. But I don't know how to use index through solrj binary format and can't find examples. Please give some help. Thanks, -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-can-i-use-solrj-binary-format-for-indexing-tp1722612p1722612.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
About setting solrconfig.xml
Hi, all. I got some question about solrconfig.xml. I have 10 fields in a document for index. (Suppose that field names are f1, f2, ... , f10.) Some user will want to search in field f1 and f5. Another user will want to search in field f2, f3 and f7. I am going to use dismax handler for this. How should I write a dismax handler to satisfy variouse need. Please give me any idea or a example. (I know Dismax's qf parameter limits fields which user want to be searched. Should I write dismax handlers for every case? I think it's wrong. How should I do?) Thanks in advance. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/About-setting-solrconfig-xml-tp1691836p1691836.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Solr, c/s type ?
I'd just like to use solr for in-house which is not web application. But I don't know how should i do? Thanks, -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-c-s-type-tp1392952p1444175.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
