Re: Distance sorting with spatial filtering
I tracked down the problem and found a workaround. If there is a
wildcard entry in schema.xml such as the following.
!-- Ignore any fields that don't already match an existing field name --
dynamicField name=* type=ignored multiValued=true /
then sort by function fails and returns Error 400 can not sort on
unindexed field: function name
Removing the name=* entry from schema.xml is a workaround. I noted
this in the Solr-1297 JIRA entry.
Scott
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 01:40, Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com wrote:
Since no one has jumped in to give the right syntax- yeah, it's a bug.
Please file a JIRA.
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Scott K s...@skister.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 21:00, Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com wrote:
I just checked out the trunk, and branch 3.x This query is accepted on both,
but gives no responses:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,x_dt,y_dt,0,0)+asc
So you are saying when you add the sort parameter you get no results
back, but do not get the error I am seeing? Should I open a Jira
ticket?
x_dt and y_dt are wildcard fields with the tdouble type. tdouble
explicitly says it is stored and indexed. Your 'longitude' and 'latitude'
fields may not be stored?
No, they are stored.
http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*rows=1wt=xmlindent=true
?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?
response
lst name=responseHeader
int name=status0/int
int name=QTime9/int
/lst
result name=response numFound=365775 start=0
doc
...
double name=latitude47.6636/double
double name=longitude-122.3054/double
Also, this is accepted on both branches:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc
The documentation for sum() does not mention single-argument calls.
This also fails
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=sum(1,2)+asc
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=sum(latitude,longitude)+asc
Scott K wrote:
According to the documentation, sorting by function has been a feature
since Solr 1.5. It seems like a major regression if this no longer
works.
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery#Sort_By_Function
The _val_ trick does not seem to work if used with a query term,
although I can try some more things to give 0 value to the query term.
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 22:21, Lance Norskoggoks...@gmail.com wrote:
It says that the field sum(1) is not indexed. You don't have a field
called 'sum(1)'. I know there has been a lot of changes in query parsing,
and sorting by functions may be on the list. But the _val_ trick is the
older one and, and you noted, still works. The _val_ trick sets the
ranking
value to the output of the function, thus indirectly doing what sort=
does.
Lance
Scott K wrote:
I get the error on all functions.
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc'
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: sum(1)
I tried another nightly build from today, Sep 7th, with the same
results. I attached the schema.xml
Thanks for the help!
Scott
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 18:43, Lance Norskoggoks...@gmail.com wrote:
Post your schema.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Scott Ks...@skister.com wrote:
The new spatial filtering (SOLR-1586) works great and is much faster
than fq={!frange. However, I am having problems sorting by distance.
If I try
GET
'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)+asc'
I get an error:
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field:
dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)
I was able to work around this with
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:* AND _val_:recip(dist(2,
latitude, longitude, 0,0),1,1,1)fl=*,score'
But why isn't sorting by functions working? I get this error with any
function I try to sort on.This is a nightly trunk build from Aug 25th.
I see SOLR-1297 was reopened, but that seems to be for edge cases.
Second question: I am using the LatLonType from the Spatial Filtering
wiki, http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpatialSearch
Are there any distance sorting functions that use this field, or do I
need to have three indexed fields, store_lat_lon, latitude, and
longitude, if I want both filtering and sorting by distance.
Thanks, Scott
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
Re: Distance sorting with spatial filtering
Since no one has jumped in to give the right syntax- yeah, it's a bug.
Please file a JIRA.
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Scott K s...@skister.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 21:00, Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com wrote:
I just checked out the trunk, and branch 3.x This query is accepted on both,
but gives no responses:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,x_dt,y_dt,0,0)+asc
So you are saying when you add the sort parameter you get no results
back, but do not get the error I am seeing? Should I open a Jira
ticket?
x_dt and y_dt are wildcard fields with the tdouble type. tdouble
explicitly says it is stored and indexed. Your 'longitude' and 'latitude'
fields may not be stored?
No, they are stored.
http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*rows=1wt=xmlindent=true
?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?
response
lst name=responseHeader
int name=status0/int
int name=QTime9/int
/lst
result name=response numFound=365775 start=0
doc
...
double name=latitude47.6636/double
double name=longitude-122.3054/double
Also, this is accepted on both branches:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc
The documentation for sum() does not mention single-argument calls.
This also fails
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=sum(1,2)+asc
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=sum(latitude,longitude)+asc
Scott K wrote:
According to the documentation, sorting by function has been a feature
since Solr 1.5. It seems like a major regression if this no longer
works.
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery#Sort_By_Function
The _val_ trick does not seem to work if used with a query term,
although I can try some more things to give 0 value to the query term.
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 22:21, Lance Norskoggoks...@gmail.com wrote:
It says that the field sum(1) is not indexed. You don't have a field
called 'sum(1)'. I know there has been a lot of changes in query parsing,
and sorting by functions may be on the list. But the _val_ trick is the
older one and, and you noted, still works. The _val_ trick sets the
ranking
value to the output of the function, thus indirectly doing what sort=
does.
Lance
Scott K wrote:
I get the error on all functions.
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc'
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: sum(1)
I tried another nightly build from today, Sep 7th, with the same
results. I attached the schema.xml
Thanks for the help!
Scott
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 18:43, Lance Norskoggoks...@gmail.com wrote:
Post your schema.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Scott Ks...@skister.com wrote:
The new spatial filtering (SOLR-1586) works great and is much faster
than fq={!frange. However, I am having problems sorting by distance.
If I try
GET
'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)+asc'
I get an error:
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field:
dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)
I was able to work around this with
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:* AND _val_:recip(dist(2,
latitude, longitude, 0,0),1,1,1)fl=*,score'
But why isn't sorting by functions working? I get this error with any
function I try to sort on.This is a nightly trunk build from Aug 25th.
I see SOLR-1297 was reopened, but that seems to be for edge cases.
Second question: I am using the LatLonType from the Spatial Filtering
wiki, http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpatialSearch
Are there any distance sorting functions that use this field, or do I
need to have three indexed fields, store_lat_lon, latitude, and
longitude, if I want both filtering and sorting by distance.
Thanks, Scott
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
Re: Distance sorting with spatial filtering
According to the documentation, sorting by function has been a feature
since Solr 1.5. It seems like a major regression if this no longer
works.
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery#Sort_By_Function
The _val_ trick does not seem to work if used with a query term,
although I can try some more things to give 0 value to the query term.
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 22:21, Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com wrote:
It says that the field sum(1) is not indexed. You don't have a field
called 'sum(1)'. I know there has been a lot of changes in query parsing,
and sorting by functions may be on the list. But the _val_ trick is the
older one and, and you noted, still works. The _val_ trick sets the ranking
value to the output of the function, thus indirectly doing what sort= does.
Lance
Scott K wrote:
I get the error on all functions.
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc'
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: sum(1)
I tried another nightly build from today, Sep 7th, with the same
results. I attached the schema.xml
Thanks for the help!
Scott
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 18:43, Lance Norskoggoks...@gmail.com wrote:
Post your schema.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Scott Ks...@skister.com wrote:
The new spatial filtering (SOLR-1586) works great and is much faster
than fq={!frange. However, I am having problems sorting by distance.
If I try
GET
'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)+asc'
I get an error:
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field:
dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)
I was able to work around this with
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:* AND _val_:recip(dist(2,
latitude, longitude, 0,0),1,1,1)fl=*,score'
But why isn't sorting by functions working? I get this error with any
function I try to sort on.This is a nightly trunk build from Aug 25th.
I see SOLR-1297 was reopened, but that seems to be for edge cases.
Second question: I am using the LatLonType from the Spatial Filtering
wiki, http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpatialSearch
Are there any distance sorting functions that use this field, or do I
need to have three indexed fields, store_lat_lon, latitude, and
longitude, if I want both filtering and sorting by distance.
Thanks, Scott
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
Re: Distance sorting with spatial filtering
I just checked out the trunk, and branch 3.x This query is accepted on
both, but gives no responses:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,x_dt,y_dt,0,0)+asc
x_dt and y_dt are wildcard fields with the tdouble type. tdouble
explicitly says it is stored and indexed. Your 'longitude' and
'latitude' fields may not be stored?
Also, this is accepted on both branches:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc
The documentation for sum() does not mention single-argument calls.
(The name Solr 1.5 is dead- the next will probably be 3.1.)
Scott K wrote:
According to the documentation, sorting by function has been a feature
since Solr 1.5. It seems like a major regression if this no longer
works.
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery#Sort_By_Function
The _val_ trick does not seem to work if used with a query term,
although I can try some more things to give 0 value to the query term.
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 22:21, Lance Norskoggoks...@gmail.com wrote:
It says that the field sum(1) is not indexed. You don't have a field
called 'sum(1)'. I know there has been a lot of changes in query parsing,
and sorting by functions may be on the list. But the _val_ trick is the
older one and, and you noted, still works. The _val_ trick sets the ranking
value to the output of the function, thus indirectly doing what sort= does.
Lance
Scott K wrote:
I get the error on all functions.
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc'
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: sum(1)
I tried another nightly build from today, Sep 7th, with the same
results. I attached the schema.xml
Thanks for the help!
Scott
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 18:43, Lance Norskoggoks...@gmail.comwrote:
Post your schema.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Scott Ks...@skister.comwrote:
The new spatial filtering (SOLR-1586) works great and is much faster
than fq={!frange. However, I am having problems sorting by distance.
If I try
GET
'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)+asc'
I get an error:
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field:
dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)
I was able to work around this with
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:* AND _val_:recip(dist(2,
latitude, longitude, 0,0),1,1,1)fl=*,score'
But why isn't sorting by functions working? I get this error with any
function I try to sort on.This is a nightly trunk build from Aug 25th.
I see SOLR-1297 was reopened, but that seems to be for edge cases.
Second question: I am using the LatLonType from the Spatial Filtering
wiki, http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpatialSearch
Are there any distance sorting functions that use this field, or do I
need to have three indexed fields, store_lat_lon, latitude, and
longitude, if I want both filtering and sorting by distance.
Thanks, Scott
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
Re: Distance sorting with spatial filtering
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 21:00, Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com wrote:
I just checked out the trunk, and branch 3.x This query is accepted on both,
but gives no responses:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,x_dt,y_dt,0,0)+asc
So you are saying when you add the sort parameter you get no results
back, but do not get the error I am seeing? Should I open a Jira
ticket?
x_dt and y_dt are wildcard fields with the tdouble type. tdouble
explicitly says it is stored and indexed. Your 'longitude' and 'latitude'
fields may not be stored?
No, they are stored.
http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*rows=1wt=xmlindent=true
?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?
response
lst name=responseHeader
int name=status0/int
int name=QTime9/int
/lst
result name=response numFound=365775 start=0
doc
...
double name=latitude47.6636/double
double name=longitude-122.3054/double
Also, this is accepted on both branches:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc
The documentation for sum() does not mention single-argument calls.
This also fails
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=sum(1,2)+asc
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=sum(latitude,longitude)+asc
Scott K wrote:
According to the documentation, sorting by function has been a feature
since Solr 1.5. It seems like a major regression if this no longer
works.
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery#Sort_By_Function
The _val_ trick does not seem to work if used with a query term,
although I can try some more things to give 0 value to the query term.
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 22:21, Lance Norskoggoks...@gmail.com wrote:
It says that the field sum(1) is not indexed. You don't have a field
called 'sum(1)'. I know there has been a lot of changes in query parsing,
and sorting by functions may be on the list. But the _val_ trick is the
older one and, and you noted, still works. The _val_ trick sets the
ranking
value to the output of the function, thus indirectly doing what sort=
does.
Lance
Scott K wrote:
I get the error on all functions.
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc'
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: sum(1)
I tried another nightly build from today, Sep 7th, with the same
results. I attached the schema.xml
Thanks for the help!
Scott
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 18:43, Lance Norskoggoks...@gmail.com wrote:
Post your schema.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Scott Ks...@skister.com wrote:
The new spatial filtering (SOLR-1586) works great and is much faster
than fq={!frange. However, I am having problems sorting by distance.
If I try
GET
'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)+asc'
I get an error:
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field:
dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)
I was able to work around this with
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:* AND _val_:recip(dist(2,
latitude, longitude, 0,0),1,1,1)fl=*,score'
But why isn't sorting by functions working? I get this error with any
function I try to sort on.This is a nightly trunk build from Aug 25th.
I see SOLR-1297 was reopened, but that seems to be for edge cases.
Second question: I am using the LatLonType from the Spatial Filtering
wiki, http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpatialSearch
Are there any distance sorting functions that use this field, or do I
need to have three indexed fields, store_lat_lon, latitude, and
longitude, if I want both filtering and sorting by distance.
Thanks, Scott
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
Re: Distance sorting with spatial filtering
I get the error on all functions.
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc'
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: sum(1)
I tried another nightly build from today, Sep 7th, with the same
results. I attached the schema.xml
Thanks for the help!
Scott
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 18:43, Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com wrote:
Post your schema.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Scott K s...@skister.com wrote:
The new spatial filtering (SOLR-1586) works great and is much faster
than fq={!frange. However, I am having problems sorting by distance.
If I try
GET
'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)+asc'
I get an error:
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)
I was able to work around this with
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:* AND _val_:recip(dist(2,
latitude, longitude, 0,0),1,1,1)fl=*,score'
But why isn't sorting by functions working? I get this error with any
function I try to sort on.This is a nightly trunk build from Aug 25th.
I see SOLR-1297 was reopened, but that seems to be for edge cases.
Second question: I am using the LatLonType from the Spatial Filtering
wiki, http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpatialSearch
Are there any distance sorting functions that use this field, or do I
need to have three indexed fields, store_lat_lon, latitude, and
longitude, if I want both filtering and sorting by distance.
Thanks, Scott
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8 ?
!--
PERFORMANCE NOTE: this schema includes many optional features and should not
be used for benchmarking. To improve performance one could
- set stored=false for all fields possible (esp large fields) when you
only need to search on the field but don't need to return the original
value.
- set indexed=false if you don't need to search on the field, but only
return the field as a result of searching on other indexed fields.
- remove all unneeded copyField statements
- for best index size and searching performance, set index to false
for all general text fields, use copyField to copy them to the
catchall text field, and use that for searching.
- For maximum indexing performance, use the StreamingUpdateSolrServer
java client.
- Remember to run the JVM in server mode, and use a higher logging level
that avoids logging every request
--
schema name=schema version=1.2
types
fieldType name=string class=solr.StrField sortMissingLast=true omitNorms=true/
!-- boolean type: true or false --
fieldType name=boolean class=solr.BoolField sortMissingLast=true omitNorms=true/
!--Binary data type. The data should be sent/retrieved in as Base64 encoded Strings --
fieldtype name=binary class=solr.BinaryField/
!--
Default numeric field types. For faster range queries, consider the tint/tfloat/tlong/tdouble types.
--
fieldType name=int class=solr.TrieIntField precisionStep=0 omitNorms=true positionIncrementGap=0/
fieldType name=float class=solr.TrieFloatField precisionStep=0 omitNorms=true positionIncrementGap=0/
fieldType name=long class=solr.TrieLongField precisionStep=0 omitNorms=true positionIncrementGap=0/
fieldType name=double class=solr.TrieDoubleField precisionStep=0 omitNorms=true positionIncrementGap=0/
fieldType name=tint class=solr.TrieIntField precisionStep=8 omitNorms=true positionIncrementGap=0/
fieldType name=tfloat class=solr.TrieFloatField precisionStep=8 omitNorms=true positionIncrementGap=0/
fieldType name=tlong class=solr.TrieLongField precisionStep=8 omitNorms=true positionIncrementGap=0/
fieldType name=tdouble class=solr.TrieDoubleField precisionStep=8 omitNorms=true positionIncrementGap=0/
fieldType name=date class=solr.TrieDateField omitNorms=true precisionStep=0 positionIncrementGap=0/
!-- A Trie based date field for faster date range queries and date faceting. --
fieldType name=tdate class=solr.TrieDateField omitNorms=true precisionStep=6 positionIncrementGap=0/
fieldType name=random class=solr.RandomSortField indexed=true /
fieldType name=location class=solr.LatLonType subFieldType=double /
!-- A text field that only splits on whitespace for exact matching of words --
fieldType name=text_ws class=solr.TextField positionIncrementGap=100
analyzer
tokenizer class=solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory/
/analyzer
/fieldType
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=0 splitOnCaseChange=1/
filter
Re: Distance sorting with spatial filtering
It says that the field sum(1) is not indexed. You don't have a field
called 'sum(1)'. I know there has been a lot of changes in query
parsing, and sorting by functions may be on the list. But the _val_
trick is the older one and, and you noted, still works. The _val_ trick
sets the ranking value to the output of the function, thus indirectly
doing what sort= does.
Lance
Scott K wrote:
I get the error on all functions.
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*sort=sum(1)+asc'
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: sum(1)
I tried another nightly build from today, Sep 7th, with the same
results. I attached the schema.xml
Thanks for the help!
Scott
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 18:43, Lance Norskoggoks...@gmail.com wrote:
Post your schema.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Scott Ks...@skister.com wrote:
The new spatial filtering (SOLR-1586) works great and is much faster
than fq={!frange. However, I am having problems sorting by distance.
If I try
GET
'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)+asc'
I get an error:
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)
I was able to work around this with
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:* AND _val_:recip(dist(2,
latitude, longitude, 0,0),1,1,1)fl=*,score'
But why isn't sorting by functions working? I get this error with any
function I try to sort on.This is a nightly trunk build from Aug 25th.
I see SOLR-1297 was reopened, but that seems to be for edge cases.
Second question: I am using the LatLonType from the Spatial Filtering
wiki, http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpatialSearch
Are there any distance sorting functions that use this field, or do I
need to have three indexed fields, store_lat_lon, latitude, and
longitude, if I want both filtering and sorting by distance.
Thanks, Scott
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
Re: Distance sorting with spatial filtering
Post your schema.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Scott K s...@skister.com wrote:
The new spatial filtering (SOLR-1586) works great and is much faster
than fq={!frange. However, I am having problems sorting by distance.
If I try
GET
'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)+asc'
I get an error:
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)
I was able to work around this with
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:* AND _val_:recip(dist(2,
latitude, longitude, 0,0),1,1,1)fl=*,score'
But why isn't sorting by functions working? I get this error with any
function I try to sort on.This is a nightly trunk build from Aug 25th.
I see SOLR-1297 was reopened, but that seems to be for edge cases.
Second question: I am using the LatLonType from the Spatial Filtering
wiki, http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpatialSearch
Are there any distance sorting functions that use this field, or do I
need to have three indexed fields, store_lat_lon, latitude, and
longitude, if I want both filtering and sorting by distance.
Thanks, Scott
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
Distance sorting with spatial filtering
The new spatial filtering (SOLR-1586) works great and is much faster
than fq={!frange. However, I am having problems sorting by distance.
If I try
GET
'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*sort=dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)+asc'
I get an error:
Error 400 can not sort on unindexed field: dist(2,latitude,longitude,0,0)
I was able to work around this with
GET 'http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:* AND _val_:recip(dist(2,
latitude, longitude, 0,0),1,1,1)fl=*,score'
But why isn't sorting by functions working? I get this error with any
function I try to sort on.This is a nightly trunk build from Aug 25th.
I see SOLR-1297 was reopened, but that seems to be for edge cases.
Second question: I am using the LatLonType from the Spatial Filtering
wiki, http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpatialSearch
Are there any distance sorting functions that use this field, or do I
need to have three indexed fields, store_lat_lon, latitude, and
longitude, if I want both filtering and sorting by distance.
Thanks, Scott
