Thanks for answering but i don't know how to write script for fetching data
from database and index it in to solr and how to setup this script as
cron-job to run automatically at certain interval.
Please suggest .
-
Thanks Regards
Romi
--
View this message in context:
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 5:37 AM, Esteban Donato
esteban.don...@gmail.com wrote:
thanks Shalin. One more question: is there any way to avoid multiple
cores replicating at the same time? Like synchronizing the
ReplicationHandler somehow?
Yes, just specify different poll intervals for each
I found a similar post -
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Problems-with-RAMDirectory-in-Solr-td1575223.html
It mentions that Java based replication might work (This is what I have
used, but didn't work for me)
More interestingly it points out that OS's file system cache maybe able to
do this
Hello,
When I send a request to Solr with fq parameter defined and an empty q
parameter, I get no answer.
I use edismax with mm = 4-1 6-2.
Any clues?
Thanks,
Elisabeth
Start from this point:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DataImportHandler
So, you can try to use this script:
#!/bin/bash
wgetProgram=wget
urlCmd='http://localhost:8080/solr/mycore/dataimport?command=delta-importclean=false'
statusCmd='http://localhost:8080/solr/mycore/dataimport?command=status'
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 12:49 PM, nipunb ni...@walmartlabs.com wrote:
I found a similar post -
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Problems-with-RAMDirectory-in-Solr-td1575223.html
It mentions that Java based replication might work (This is what I have
used, but didn't work for me)
Solr
Can i not use it for full-import ??
-
Thanks Regards
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-to-index-data-in-solr-form-database-automatically-tp3102893p3113002.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 27/06/11 11:01, Romi wrote:
Can i not use it for full-import ??
yes!!!
You must only change
urlCmd='http://localhost:8080/solr/mycore/dataimport?command=delta-importclean=false'
in
urlCmd='http://localhost:8080/solr/mycore/dataimport?command=full-importclean=false'
or
Hello,
I am using solr1.4 on ubuntu 10.10.
Currently I got the requirement to do the ExactMatch for PhraseSearch.
I tried googling but I did'nt got the exact solution.
I am doing the search on 'text' field.
if I give the search query :
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=the search agency
Hi,
When one issues a command
admin/coreaction=CREATEcore=blablainstanceDir=...dataDir=../../foobar
, what gets created first on disk?
Is it the new solr.xml or the new data directory?
Cheers,
Jerome.
--
Jerome Eteve.
http://sigstp.blogspot.com/
http://twitter.com/jeteve
Hi,
I came across the indexing error below. It happened in a huge batch update
from Nutch with SolrJ 3.1. Since the crawl was huge it is very hard to trace
the error back to a specific document. So i try my luck here: anyone seen this
before with SolrJ 3.1? Anything else on the Nutch part i
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Mohammad Shariq shariqn...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I am using solr1.4 on ubuntu 10.10.
Currently I got the requirement to do the ExactMatch for PhraseSearch.
I tried googling but I did'nt got the exact solution.
I am doing the search on 'text' field.
if I
I suggest avoid illegal UTF-8 characters by pre-filtering your
contentstream before loading.
Unicode UTF-8(hex)
U+07FFdf bf
U+0800e0 a0 80
So there is no UTF-8 0x. It is illegal.
Regards
Am 27.06.2011 12:40, schrieb Markus Jelsma:
Hi,
I came across the indexing error below.
Your best bet is MMapDirectoryFactory, you can come very close to the
performance of the RAMDirectory. Unfortunatelly this setup with
Master_on_disk-Slaves_in_ram type of setup is not possible using
solr.
We are moving our architecture to solr at the moment, and this is one
of missings we have to
I can use 'String' instead of 'Text' for exact match, but I need ExactMatch
only on PhraseSearch.
On 27 June 2011 16:29, Gora Mohanty g...@mimirtech.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Mohammad Shariq shariqn...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
I am using solr1.4 on ubuntu 10.10.
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Bernd Fehling
bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
So there is no UTF-8 0x. It is illegal.
you are wrong: it is legally encoded as a three byte sequence: ef bf bf
Am 27.06.2011 14:02, schrieb Robert Muir:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Bernd Fehling
bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
So there is no UTF-8 0x. It is illegal.
you are wrong: it is legally encoded as a three byte sequence: ef bf bf
Unicode U+ ist UTF-8 byte sequence ef
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Bernd Fehling
bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Unicode U+ ist UTF-8 byte sequence ef bf bf that is right.
But I was saying that UTF-8 0x (which is byte sequence ff ff) is
illegal
and that's what the java.io.CharConversionException is complaining
Jérôme,
the complete directory structure, including required files, has to be
created first - manually. the admin/cores will only activate the core
for solr, that's it :)
Regards
Stefan
Am 27.06.2011 12:20, schrieb Jérôme Étévé:
Hi,
When one issues a command
Am 27.06.2011 14:35, schrieb Robert Muir:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Bernd Fehling
bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
Unicode U+ ist UTF-8 byte sequence ef bf bf that is right.
But I was saying that UTF-8 0x (which is byte sequence ff ff) is
illegal
and that's what the
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Bernd Fehling
bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
correct!!!
but what i said, is totally different than what you said.
you are still wrong.
Am 27.06.2011 14:48, schrieb Robert Muir:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Bernd Fehling
bernd.fehl...@uni-bielefeld.de wrote:
correct!!!
but what i said, is totally different than what you said.
you are still wrong.
http://www.unicode.org/faq//utf_bom.html
see Q: What is a UTF?
When I send a request to Solr with fq parameter defined and
an empty q
parameter, I get no answer.
I use edismax with mm = 4-1 6-2.
Any clues?
You can use q.alt=*:*
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DisMaxQParserPlugin#q.alt
I can use 'String' instead of 'Text'
for exact match, but I need ExactMatch
only on PhraseSearch.
I got your point. Your best bet can be crate an extra field field populated via
copyField declaration. Type of this new field won't have stemming, stop-word
removal etc. (according to your exact
Actually - you are both wrong!
It is true that 0x is a valid UTF8 character, and not a valid UTF8
byte sequence.
But the parser is reporting (or trying to) that 0x is an invalid XML
character.
And Robert - if the wording offends you, you might want to send a note
to Tatu
OK - re-reading your message it seems maybe that is what you were trying
to say too, Robert. FWIW I agree with you that XML is rigid, sometimes
for purely arbitrary reasons. But nobody has really helped Markus here
- unfortunately, there is no easy way out of this mess. What I do to
handle
Hello,
Am 27.06.2011 um 12:40 schrieb Markus Jelsma:
Hi,
I came across the indexing error below. It happened in a huge batch update
from Nutch with SolrJ 3.1. Since the crawl was huge it is very hard to trace
the error back to a specific document. So i try my luck here: anyone seen
Hi! I'm new to Apache Solr and trying to make a query using search terms
against a field called normalizedContents and of type text.
All of the search terms must exist in the field. Problem is, I'm getting
inconsistent results.
For example, the solr index has only one document with
Am 27.06.2011 15:56, schrieb Jihed Amine Maaref:
- normalizedContents:(EDOUAR* AND une) doesn't return anything
This was discussed few days ago:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Conflict-in-wildcard-query-and-spellchecker-in-solr-search-tt3095198.html
- normalizedContents:(edouar* AND un)
has this bug been fixed? i'm using solr 3.1 and it still seems to be an
issue. if i do a search for bird house i still get embird/em
emhouse/em returned instead of embird house/em, which is the desired
result.
--
View this message in context:
hı
Its the same error I mentioned here
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/strange-utf-8-problem-td3094473.html.
Also if you use solr 1.4.1 there is no problem like that.
--
View this message in context:
thanks!
2011/6/27 Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com
When I send a request to Solr with fq parameter defined and
an empty q
parameter, I get no answer.
I use edismax with mm = 4-1 6-2.
Any clues?
You can use q.alt=*:*
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DisMaxQParserPlugin#q.alt
Hi Markus
I've seen similar issue before (but not with solr) when processing files as xml.
In our case the problem was due to processing a utf16 file with a byte
order mark. This presents itself as
0x to the xml parser which is not used by utf8 (the bom unicode
would be represented as efbfbf
On Monday 27 June 2011 16:33:16 lee carroll wrote:
Hi Markus
I've seen similar issue before (but not with solr) when processing files as
xml. In our case the problem was due to processing a utf16 file with a
byte order mark. This presents itself as
0x to the xml parser which is not
I don't think this is a BOM - that would be 0xfeff. Anyway the problem
we usually see w/processing XML with BOMs is in UTF8 (which really
doesn't need a BOM since it's a byte stream anyway), in which if you
transform the stream (bytes) into a reader (chars) before the xml parser
can see it,
This was a little curious to me and I wondered what the thought process
was behind it before I decide to change it.
Thanks - Tod
Hi Tod,
A list of keywords would be fine in a non multi valued field:
keywords : xxx yyy sss aaa
multi value field would allow you to repeat the field when indexing
keywords: xxx
keywords: yyy
keywords: sss
etc
On 27 June 2011 16:13, Tod listac...@gmail.com wrote:
This was a little
Hi all-
I have a problem that I'm not sure how it can be (if it can be) solved in Solr.
I am using Solr 3.2 with patch 2524 installed to provide grouping. I need to
return the count of unique records that match a particular query.
For an example of what I'm talking about, imagine I have an
Hi all, thanks for your comments. I seem to have fixed it by now by simply
stripping away all non-character codepoints [1] by iterating over the
individual chars and checking them against:
if (ch % 0x1 != 0x || ch % 0x1 != 0xfffe || (ch = 0xfdd0 ch =
0xfdef)) { pass; }
Comments?
Of course it doesn't work like this: use AND instead of OR!
On Monday 27 June 2011 17:50:01 Markus Jelsma wrote:
Hi all, thanks for your comments. I seem to have fixed it by now by simply
stripping away all non-character codepoints [1] by iterating over the
individual chars and checking them
Markus - if you want to make sure not to offend XML parsers, you should
strip all characters not in this list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML#Valid_characters
You'll see that article talks about XML 1.1, which accepts a wider range
of characters than XML 1.0, and I believe the Woodstox
Of course, i can't print the system bell and stuff like that in XML. I'll
improve the method to get rid of non-printable control characters as well.
On Monday 27 June 2011 18:16:08 Mike Sokolov wrote:
Markus - if you want to make sure not to offend XML parsers, you should
strip all characters
On the SolrJetty page
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrJetty
there's a link to a tar ball
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrJetty?action=AttachFiledo=viewtarget=DEMO_multiple_webapps_jetty_6.1.3.tgz
which fails with the error
You are not allowed to do AttachFile on this page.
Can someone fix
On the SolrJetty page
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrJetty
there's a link to a tar ball
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrJetty?action=AttachFiledo=viewtarget=DEMO_multiple_webapps_jetty_6.1.3.tgz
which fails with the error
You are not allowed to do AttachFile on this page.
Can
So I made a custom search component which runs right after the query
component and this custom component will update the score of each based on
some things (and no, I definitely can't use existing components). I didn't
see any easy way to just update the score so what I currently do is
something
Thanks for the pointer to MMapDirectoryFactory.
Not having replication with RAMDirectoryFactory is a deal killer. We dont
want to index on the machines that serve queries.
From what I can gather from reading, MMapDirectory + SSD could be a happy
medium.
I'll try to evaluate these a bit more
Steve,
I like your geospatial boosting algorithm; it makes sense.
FYI I'm collaborating with a couple other Lucene/Solr committers on a new
geospatial module here: http://code.google.com/p/lucene-spatial-playground/
It is very much in-progress. There is variable-points per document support
This should work with dynamic fields too. Are you having any problems with
it?
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Brandon Fish brandon.j.f...@gmail.comwrote:
Are there any schema changes that would cause problems with the following
procedure from the
FAQ
One more thing, it's not necessary to restart the server, just to reload the
core: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/CoreAdmin#RELOAD
2011/6/27 Tomás Fernández Löbbe tomasflo...@gmail.com
This should work with dynamic fields too. Are you having any problems with
it?
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:14
I'm not having any issues. I was just asking to see if any backward
incompatible changes exist that would require a server restart. Thanks.
2011/6/27 Tomás Fernández Löbbe tomasflo...@gmail.com
This should work with dynamic fields too. Are you having any problems with
it?
On Thu, Jun 23,
I have a field named content with the following definition
field name=content type=text indexed=true stored=true
multiValued=true termVectors=true termPositions=true
termOffsets=true/
I'm now trying to execute a query against content and get back the term
vectors for the pieces that matched
Hi Jan,
The regex exclude is system-wide. I might have to do the regex
filtering when loading the data.
The problem is that there will be a process querying solr for matching
records which will be alerts.
I have to prevent that the matching entries are loaded but not indexed.
Thanks for the
I have a need to take an incoming solr query and apply some additional
constraints to it on the Solr end. Our previous implementation used a
QueryWrapperFilter along with some custom code to build a new Filter from
the query provided. How can we plug this filter into Solr?
I am trying to run through a few failure scenarios using a dual master
approach using NFS as a shared storage solution to hold the Master's
indexes. My goal is to be able to bring up a secondary master in the case
that the primary master fails. I have several slaves using replication to
pull
: Simply trying to understand why these strings generated such scores, and as
: far as I can understand, the only difference between them is the field
: norms, as all the other results maintain themselves.
...
: Well, if this is true, the field norm for my first document should be 0.5
:
I have an analyzer setup in my schema like so:
analyzer
tokenizer class=solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory/
filter class=solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory/
filter class=solr.NGramFilterFactory minGramSize=1
maxGramSize=2/
/analyzer
What's happening is if I index a term like toys and dolls,
I have replicated a solr instance without configs as the slave has
it's own config.
The replication has failed. My plan was to use replication to remove
the indexes I no longer wish to use which is why the slave has a
different schema.xml file.
Does anyone know why the replication has failed?
I guess 'to' may be listed in 'stopWords' .
On 28 June 2011 08:27, entdeveloper cameron.develo...@gmail.com wrote:
I have an analyzer setup in my schema like so:
analyzer
tokenizer class=solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory/
filter class=solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory/
filter
Separate the Analyzer into a index time analyzer with NgramFilter Factory
and Query time analyzer without the N-gram Filter Factory
Since your query is analyzed by this analyzer and produces more than one
tokens for the given keyoword and hence the result is phrase query.
Regards
Sujatha
On
59 matches
Mail list logo
