hello,
I have plenty of docs and each docs maybe connected to many user-defined
tags.I have used solr-cloud, and use JOIN to do this kind of job,and recently i
know solr-cloud does not support distributed search.AND so this is a big
problem so far.AND the decouple is quite
I'm going to use the implicitdocrouter for sharding. Our sharding is not
based on a hashing mechanism.
As far as I understand, if I don't provide the numShards parameter, implicit
router is used. My question is:
Using the implicit routing, how can I assign a new core to a new shard,
instead of
bq: ... i know sole-cloud does not support distributed search..
huh? Or do you mean that solr cloud doesn't support distributed join?
You really have to give us a better idea what the problem you're
trying to solve is, you might review:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
Best
Erick
yes，solr-cloud does not support distributed join.any good idea to slove my
problem？
Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.com编写：
bq: ... i know sole-cloud does not support distributed search..
huh? Or do you mean that solr cloud doesn't support distributed join?
You really have to give us a
I'm pretty sure there's been some hardening of deleting
nodes/collections to deal with nodes in a bad state, I'm pretty sure
they're available in 4.3. Not guaranteeing that this would solve your
problem, but it's probably worth looking at the CHANGES.txt for 4.3 to
see if it's worth exploring
One note to add. There's been lots of discussion here about
index size, which is a slippery concept. To whit:
Look at your index directory, specifically the *.fdt and *.fdx files.
That's where the verbatim copy of your data is held, i.e.
whenever you specify 'stored=true', and is almost totally
Uhhhm HttpSolrServer.deleteById (several varieties)?
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/api-4_0_0-BETA/org/apache/solr/client/solrj/SolrServer.html#deleteById(java.util.List)
the rest of your question is confusing.
bq: how can I reindex in the same way one particular row
Solr does that
Well, the usual answer is to flatten your data such that you do not
_have_ to do a join in the first place.
But other than that kind of super-general answer, your question is too
lacking in detail to
provide any useful response.
Best
Erick
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 10:04 AM, qibaoy...@gmail.com
On 4/20/2013 11:21 PM, Tania Marinova wrote:
so my question is as I have the abillity to index one partricular row (you
saw my code) how can I reindex in the same way one particular row assuming
that I know the id of that row (so i can select it) so it's no longer indexed
in solr. My
There's no problem here, but I'm curious about how batches of updates
are handled on the Solr server side in Solr cloud?
Going over the code for DistributedUpdateProcessor and
SolrCmdDistributor, it appears that the batch is broken down and docs
are processed one-by-one. By processed, I mean that
Today is my day for conceptual questions ;-)
From what I understand, CloudSolrServer is smart because it uses
cluster state information pulled from Zookeeper to send update
requests to leaders instead of replicas. This provides a slight
benefit in that the update request will land on the correct
I'm pretty sure there's a JIRA to do just that, it just hasn't been
implemented yet.
I guess it's one of those things that would undoubtedly be more efficient, but
whether it would really be noticeable or not is an open question. At any rate,
there are more important fish to fry but if you'd like
Same reply as your other question I think It's on the drawing
board but hasn't percolated up past other urgent issues...
Erick
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Timothy Potter thelabd...@gmail.com wrote:
Today is my day for conceptual questions ;-)
From what I understand, CloudSolrServer
Ok, thanks for both responses - agreed on the bigger fish part too,
but for this one I wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking something.
Now that I know it's a reasonable approach, I'll give some more
thought.
Thanks.
Tim
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Erick Erickson
erickerick...@gmail.com
1. Relatively small numbers of dynamic fields are fine. 20-40 would be fine.
1,000 would become problematic. hundreds would also likely be problematic,
but it would depend on the application and its data.
2. Sparse dynamic fields are less problematic than larger numbers of fully
populated
I was reading here: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/NewSolrCloudDesign
There says something about:
*Split_partition* : (params : partitionoptional). The partition is split
into two halves. If the partition parameter is not supplied, the partition
with the largest number of documents is identified as
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Timothy Potter thelabd...@gmail.com wrote:
There's no problem here, but I'm curious about how batches of updates
are handled on the Solr server side in Solr cloud?
Going over the code for DistributedUpdateProcessor and
SolrCmdDistributor, it appears that the
I know that: when using SolrCloud we define the number of shards into the
system. When we start up new Solr instances each one will be a a leader for
a shard, and if I continue to start up new Solr instances (that has
exceeded the number number of shards) each one will be a replica for each
leader
That's awesome! Thanks Yonik.
Tim
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@lucidworks.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Timothy Potter thelabd...@gmail.com wrote:
There's no problem here, but I'm curious about how batches of updates
are handled on the Solr server side in
When I read documentation about Hbase it says RAID is not recommended for
many cases. When we talk about SolrCloud (and consider that if a machine
goes down there is a failure system via replicas) and when we think about
the purposes of different RAID disks:
do they true -
using RAID systems for:
All in all is there anything that we can say before measuring the
performance comparison of storing the stored values of documents at Hbase?
I mean as like:
* I will need to communicate with Hbase and this will produce more latency
than Lucene
* I will loose some built-in functionality that
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3154
- Mark
On Apr 21, 2013, at 1:28 PM, Timothy Potter thelabd...@gmail.com wrote:
Today is my day for conceptual questions ;-)
From what I understand, CloudSolrServer is smart because it uses
cluster state information pulled from Zookeeper to
On 4/21/2013 4:23 PM, Furkan KAMACI wrote:
When I read documentation about Hbase it says RAID is not recommended for
many cases. When we talk about SolrCloud (and consider that if a machine
goes down there is a failure system via replicas) and when we think about
the purposes of different RAID
We just took an installation of 4.1 which was working fine and changed it to
run as solr cloud. We encountered the most incredibly bizarre apparent bug:
In the JSON output, a colon ':' changed to a comma ',', which of course
broke the JSON parser. I'm guessing I should file this as a bug, but it
Hi,
Agreed it is a typo. And yes I can use one set of analyzers and tokenizers
for query as well as indexing but that too will not solve my problem
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/is-phrase-search-possible-in-solr-tp4057312p4057802.html
Sent from the Solr -
Hi Jack,
Making a changes in the schema either keyword tokenizer or copy field option
which u suggested would require reindexing of entire data. Is there an
option wherein if I have a query in double quotes it simply ignores all the
tokenizers and analyzers.
--
View this message in context:
The NewSolrCloudDesign document is not accurate. It was initially created
to record ideas but the implementation of SolrCloud has evolved to be
different from the design in that document.
SOLR-3755 splits a given partition and creates two partitions of half the
hash range of the parent partition.
Shingling filter may be help.
I want to do a phrase search in solr without analyzers being applied to it
eg - If I search for *DelhiDareDevil* (i.e - with inverted commas)it
should search the exact text and not apply any analyzers or tokenizers on
this field
However if i search for
It is a date field.
field name=timestamp type=date indexed=true stored=true default=NOW
multiValued=false/
./zahoor
On 19-Apr-2013, at 5:02 PM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm guessing that your timestamp is a tdate, which stores extra
information in the index for fast
You can store JSON in Solr as a string field. For searching you need to
pull out into separate fields.
To store JSON and use wt=jaon without messing with the field try my patch.
Solr-4685 and there is a field patch to take XML and convert to JSON if you
need that.
[image: Solr]
- Solr
Hi,
If I use shinglingFilter than all type of queries will be impacted. I want
queries within double quotes to be an exact search but for queries without
double quotes all analyzers and tokenizers should be applied. Is there a
setting or a configuration in schema.xml which can cater this
31 matches
Mail list logo
