Hi,
I think there is a mixup here. SolrCloud has the same sharding
capabilities as ES at this point, I believe, other than manual moving of
shards Mark mentions.
Otis
--
Solr ElasticSearch Support
http://sematext.com/
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed,
While this is something completely different, have you considered using
SolrEntityProcessor instead? (assuming all your fields are stored)
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DataImportHandler#SolrEntityProcessor
Otis
--
Solr ElasticSearch Support
http://sematext.com/
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at
Thanks Otis,
I had not considered that approach, however not all of our fields are stored so
that's not going to work for me.
I'm wondering if its slow because there is just the one reader getting passed
to the index writer... I noticed today that the addIndexes method can take an
array of
The other odd thing here is that this should not stop replication at all. When
the slave is ahead, it will still have it's index replaced.
- Mark
On Mar 22, 2013, at 1:26 AM, Mark Miller markrmil...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm working on testing to try and catch what you are seeing here:
Hi,
I use solrcloud 4.1.
I start up two solr nodes A and B and then created a new collection using
CoreAdmin to A using one shard, so Node A is leader.
Then I index some docs to it. Then I created the same collection using
CoreAdmin to B to become a replica. I found that solr will sync all
Hi Shawn,
Thank you for your response. Yes, that's strange. By enabling DocValues the
information about missing fields is lost, which changes the way of sorting
as well. Adding default value to the fields can change a logic of
application dramatically (I can't set default value to 0 for all
To add to the discussion.
We're running classic master/slave replication (not solrcloud) with 1 master
and 2 slaves and I noticed the slave having a higher version number than the
master the other day as well.
In our case, knock on wood, it hasn't stopped replication.
If you'd like a copy
I am sorry for the confusion, I had assumed that there was a way to issue
commands to ES to have it change it's current shard layout (i.e. go from 2
to 4 for instance) but on further reading of their documentation I do not
see that. That being said is there a timeline on being able to add shards
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Chris Hostetter
hossman_luc...@fucit.org wrote:
: Just add {!cache=false} to the filter in your query
: (http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrCaching#filterCache).
...
: I need to use the filter query feature to filter my results, but I
: don't want the
That issue was already with solr 4.1.
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/replication-problems-with-solr4-1-td4039647.html
Nice to know that it is still there in 4.2.
With some luck it will make it to 4.2.1 ;-)
Regards
Bernd
Am 21.03.2013 21:08, schrieb Uomesh:
Hi,
I am seeing an issue
If I want to use Solr in a web search engine what kind of strategies should
I follow about how to run Solr. I mean I can run it via embedded jetty or
use war and deploy to a container? You should consider that I will have
heavy work load on my Solr.
Thanks a lot, it was exactly what I need, sorry for not being so clear with
my question :).
Gian Maria.
-Original Message-
From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 3:04 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; alkamp...@nablasoft.com
Subject: Re:
Hi,
I have a collection with more than 4K fields, but mostly Trie*Fields types.
It is used for faceting,sorting,searching and statsComponent. It works
pretty fine on Amazon 4xm1.large (7.5GB RAM) EC2 boxes. I'm using
SolrCloud, multi A-Z setup and ephemeral storage. Index is managed by mmap,
4GB
Yes Anshum exactly what I was looking for. Is this being targeted in a
particular solr release? I see that some of the related issues are
targeted for 4.3, is that the goal for this as well?
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Anshum Gupta ans...@anshumgupta.netwrote:
Hi Jamie,
There's
Hi
There might not be a final cure with more RAM if you are CPU bound. Scoring 90M
docs is some work. Can you check what's going on during those 15 seconds? Is
your CPU at 100%? Try an (foo OR bar OR baz) search which generates 100mill
hits and see if that is slow too, even if you don't use
Hi,
I use solrcloud 4.1.
I start up two solr nodes A and B and then created a new collection using
CoreAdmin to A using one shard, so Node A is leader.
Then I index some docs to it. Then I created the same collection using
CoreAdmin to B to become a replica. I found that solr will sync all
Hi Shawan,
I have seen your post on solr cloude Master-Master configuration on two
servers. I have to use the same Solr structure, but from long I am not able to
configure it to comunicate between two server, on single server it works fine.
Can you pls help me out to provide required config
I'm using the Solr Suggester for autocompletion with WFSTLookup suggest
component, and a text file with phrases and weights. (
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/Suggester)
I found that the following filter made it impossible to match on
ampersands. So I removed it. But I'm sure it was there for a
On 3/21/13 10:50 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
On 3/21/2013 4:05 AM, Per Steffensen wrote:
Can anyone else elaborate? How to activate it? How to make sure, for
sorting, that sort-field-value for all docs are not read into memory for
sorting - leading to OOM when you have a lot of docs? Can this
On 3/22/2013 8:54 AM, Per Steffensen wrote:
Me too. I will find out soon - I hope! But re-indexing is kinda a
problem for us, but we will figure out.
Any guide to re-index all you stuff anywhere, so I do it the easiest
way? Guess maybe there are some nice tricks about steaming data directly
Dear List,
We are using solr-4.2 to build an index of 5M docs each limited to 6K
in size. Conceptually we are modelling a stack of documents. Here is a
excerpt from our schema.xml
dynamicField name=publicationBody_* type=string
indexed=false stored=true multiValued=false
There are a few things going on here that caused this, all resolved in 4.2 as
far as I know.
- Mark
On Mar 22, 2013, at 3:56 AM, bradhill99 bradhil...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi,
I use solrcloud 4.1.
I start up two solr nodes A and B and then created a new collection using
CoreAdmin to A using
Are you replicating configuration files as well?
- Mark
On Mar 22, 2013, at 6:38 AM, John, Phil (CSS) philj...@capita.co.uk wrote:
To add to the discussion.
We're running classic master/slave replication (not solrcloud) with 1 master
and 2 slaves and I noticed the slave having a higher
with the on disk option.
Could you elaborate on that?
Den 22/03/2013 05.25 skrev Mark Miller markrmil...@gmail.com:
You might try using docvalues with the on disk option and try and let the
OS manage all the memory needed for all the faceting/sorting. This would
require Solr 4.2.
- Mark
Hi Mrk,
I am replicating below config files but not replicating solrconfig.xml.
confFiles:schema.xml, elevate.xml, stopwords.txt, mapping-FoldToASCII.txt,
mapping-ISOLatin1Accent.txt, protwords.txt, spellings.txt, synonyms.txt
also strange I am seeing big Gen difference between Master and
Also, I am replicating only on commit and startup.
Thanks,
Umesh
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Umesh Sharma uom...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Mrk,
I am replicating below config files but not replicating solrconfig.xml.
confFiles: schema.xml, elevate.xml, stopwords.txt,
I use Solr 4.1.0 and Nutch 2.1, Java 1.7.0_17, Tomcat 7.0, Intellij IDEA
12.with a Centos 6.4 at my 64 bit computer.
I run that command succesfully:
bin/nutch solrindex http://localhost:8080/solr -index
However when I run that command:
bin/nutch solrindex http://localhost:8080/solr -reindex
I
And your also on 4.2?
- Mark
On Mar 22, 2013, at 12:41 PM, Uomesh uom...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, I am replicating only on commit and startup.
Thanks,
Umesh
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Umesh Sharma uom...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Mrk,
I am replicating below config files but not
Hello,
Further investigation shows the following pattern, for both DirectIndex and
wordbreak spellchekers.
Assume that in all cases there are spellchecker results when distrib=false
In distributed mode (distrib=true)
case when matches=0
1. group=true, no spellcheck results
2.
On 3/22/2013 9:24 AM, Raghav Karol wrote:
We run this index in 8 solr sharded in 8 solr cores on a single host
an m2.4xlarge EC2 instances. We do not use zookeeper (because of
operational issues on our live indexes) and manage the sharding
ourselves.
For this index we run with -Xmx30G and
Hi David and Jan,
I wrote the blog post, and David, you are right, the problem we had was
with phrase queries because our positions lists are so huge. Boolean
queries don't need to read the positions lists. I think you need to
determine whether you are CPU bound or I/O bound.It is possible
: Thank you for your response. Yes, that's strange. By enabling DocValues the
: information about missing fields is lost, which changes the way of sorting
: as well. Adding default value to the fields can change a logic of
: application dramatically (I can't set default value to 0 for all
:
: parameter *omitTermFreqAndPositions*
the key thing to remember being: if you use this, then by omiting
positions you can no longer do phrase queries.
: or you can use a custom similarity class that overrides the term freq and
: return one for only that field.
:
I've created an issue and patch here that makes it possible to specify
transient and loadOnStatup on core creation:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4631
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:14 AM, didier deshommes dfdes...@gmail.comwrote:
Thanks. Is there a way to pass loadOnStartup and/or
: is there any way, if i can get term vector information of specific word
: only, like i can pass the word, and it will just return term position and
: frequency for that word only?
:
: and also if i can pass the position e.g. startPosition=5 and endPosition=10;
: then it will return terms,
That was to you Phil.
So it seems this is a problem with the configuration replication case I would
guess - I didn't really look at that path in the 4.2 fixes I worked on.
I did add it to the new testing I'm doing since I've suspected it (it will
prompt a core reload that doesn't happen when
Alex,
I added your comments to SOLR-3758
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3758) , which seems to me to be the
very same issue.
If you need this to work now and if you cannot devise a fix yourself, then
perhaps a workaround is if the query returns with 0 results, re-issue the query
Thanks.
I can fix this, but going over code it seems it is not easy to figure out where
the whole request and response come from.
I followed up SpellCheckComponent#finishStage
and found out that SearchHandler#handleRequestBody calls this function.
However, which part calls
Ok, this is very bizzare.
If I insert more than one document at a time using the update handler like
so:
[{id:1,foo_ap:bar|50}},{id:2,foo_ap:bar|75}]
It actually stores the same payload value 50 for both docs.
That seems like a bug, no?
There was a core change in 4.1 to how payloads were
Thanks, Mark!
The core node names in the solr.xml in solr4.2 is great! Maybe in 4.3 it
can be supported via API?
Also I am glad you mentioned in other post the chance to namespace
zookeeper by adding a path to the end of the comma-delim zk hosts. That
works out really well in our situation for
On Mar 22, 2013, at 5:54 PM, Gary Yngve gary.yn...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Mark!
The core node names in the solr.xml in solr4.2 is great! Maybe in 4.3 it
can be supported via API?
It is with the core admin api - do you mean the collections api? Please make a
JIRA for any feature
Alex,
You may want to move over to the dev user's list now that you're working on
code. Or if you would rather not subscribe to the dev-list, add yourself as a
watcher to SOLR-3758 and comment further there. This will help us keep track
on progress for the issue.
The short answer is that in
On Mar 22, 2013, at 5:54 PM, jimtronic jimtro...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, this is very bizzare.
If I insert more than one document at a time using the update handler like
so:
[{id:1,foo_ap:bar|50}},{id:2,foo_ap:bar|75}]
It actually stores the same payload value 50 for both docs.
That
I have a situation we just discovered in solr4.2 where there are previously
cached results from a limited field list, and when querying for the whole
field list, it responds differently depending on which shard gets the query
(no extra replicas). It either returns the document on the limited
I have been playing around with the bq/bf/boost query parameters available in
dismax/edismax. I am using the Lucid parser as my default parser for the query.
The lucid parser is an extension of the DisMax parser and should contain
everything that is available in that parser. My goal is boost
I just indicated that JVM parameter:
-Dsolr.solr.home=/home/projects/lucene-solr/solr/solr_home
solr_home is where is my config files etc. stands. My solr.xml has that
lines:
cores adminPath=/admin/cores defaultCoreName=collection1
host=${host:} hostPort=${jetty.port:}
You'll have to contact Lucid's support for questions about their code. (I've
been away from that code too long to recall much about it.)
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Miller, Will Jr
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 7:07 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Boost
Why would you use dismax for the query() when you want to match a simple term
to one field?
If you share echoParams=all the answer may lie somewhere therein?
--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com
23. mars 2013 kl. 00:07
Are you 100% sure you use the exact jars for 4.1.0 *everywhere*, and that
you're not blending older versions from the Nutch distro in your classpath here?
Any ideas?
BTW: What was your question here regarding Jetty vs Tomcat?
--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS -
This is the echo params... It looks like it ignores the qf in the FunctionQuery
and instead takes the qf of the main query.
lst name=params
str name=spellchecktrue/str
str name=facettrue/str
str name=sortscore desc/str
str name=facet.limit11/str
str
Some time ago I had worked with a fellow developer to put together an addon
to the (then) current Solr Highlighter to support fetching fields from an
external source (like a database for instance). The general mechanics seem
to work properly but I am seeing issues now where the highlights do not
51 matches
Mail list logo
