Fields need to be copied. You can shorten the schema with using wildcards
*.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 9:03 AM Ritesh Kumar
wrote:
> Yes, it can be used.
> But, what if I have other such facets on different other fields. Use of
> copyField will require me to create a dedicated copy field for each
Thanks Erik.
Please confirm
if keyword = "nokia"
*bq=_val_:%22payload(vals_dpf,noika)%22=edismax*
*wil this query work for me ?.*
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 12:12 PM Erik Hatcher wrote:
> This blog I wrote will help. Let us know how it goes.
>
>
This blog I wrote will help. Let us know how it goes.
https://lucidworks.com/2017/09/14/solr-payloads/
Erik
> On Dec 7, 2018, at 01:31, Midas A wrote:
>
> I have a field at my schema named *val_dpf* . I want that *val_dpf* should
> have payloaded values. i.e.
>
> noika|0.46
I have a field at my schema named *val_dpf* . I want that *val_dpf* should
have payloaded values. i.e.
noika|0.46 mobile|0.37 samsung|0.19 redmi|0.22
When a user searches for a keyword i.e. nokia I want to add 0.46 to usual
score. If user searches for samsung, 0.19 should be added .
how can
Yes, it can be used.
But, what if I have other such facets on different other fields. Use of
copyField will require me to create a dedicated copy field for each such
facet.
I want to know if there is any other option where I do not have to add
multiple copy fields.
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 7:06 PM
Environment: Solr 7.4
I use mutable managed schema. I need a way for getting notification when a new
field is added into schema.
First, I try to extend "org.apache.solr.schema.ManagedIndexSchema".
Unfortunately, it is defined as final class, so that I am not able to extend it.
Then, I try
Hi Erick,
First off: " Whether that experience is accurate or not is certainly
debatable." Just want to acknowledge the work you put in on these forums,
and how much we DO appreciate you helping us out. I've been in this game
long enough to know when listening to the experts is a good thing...
The short form is that the query parsers do not implement Boolean
logic by design. The boolean operators are approximated more or less
accurately by using parentheses. So try:
(content:bement AND status:relevant) OR source_name:Web
or, using the "real" syntax, something like:
+content:bement
Dear All,
Nobody is able to tell me if this structure can be querying with whole parents ?
Sorry for this second message,
Sincerely,
Bruno
-Message d'origine-
De : Bruno Mannina [mailto:bmann...@matheo-software.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 5 décembre 2018 11:33
À :
I suspect nobody wants to broach this topic, this has to have come up before,
but I can not find an authoritative answer. How does the Standard Query Parser
evaluate boolean expressions? I have three fields, content, status and
source_name. The expression
content:bement AND status:relevant
First, your indexing rate _probably_ isn't the culprit if it's as slow
as you indicate, although testing will tell.
bq. could it be that we're waiting TOO LONG between stopping the solr
processes on the different servers?
At your query rate this is probably not an issue. One thing you might
do is
bq: so every time making copy field will not feasible
What's your evidence? If you have a zillion documents and a very large
corpus, that's one thing. But 10M docs isn't very much and you can use
copyFields all over the place.
Plus do you have to search the fields separately too? If not,
Is solr-dev forum I came across this post
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Rebalance-Leaders-Leader-node-deleted-when-rebalancing-leaders-td4417040.html
May be it will shed some light?
--
Vadim
> -Original Message-
> From: Atita Arora [mailto:atitaar...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday,
> On Dec 6, 2018, at 12:59 AM, Bernd Fehling
> wrote:
>
> Am 05.12.18 um 17:11 schrieb Walter Underwood:
>> I’ve never heard a recommendation to have three times as much RAM as the
>> heap. That doesn’t make sense to me.
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPerformanceProblems#RAM
>
Hi,
I am reading on Solr’s Parallel SQL.
How each replica partition the results by using HashQParser plugin and
shuffle the tuples with same values in the partition key field to same
worker node ?
How do we know the partition key field values?
Thanks,
Swathi.
Hello, Ritesh.
It's obviously done with copyField.
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 4:26 PM Ritesh Kumar
wrote:
> Hello team,
>
> I am trying to prepare facet on a field of type string. The facet data will
> be shown according to the user's query on this very field.
>
> required="false"
Hello team,
I am trying to prepare facet on a field of type string. The facet data will
be shown according to the user's query on this very field.
As this field is of type string, it works fine with case sensitive query. I
want to be able to query on this field irrespective of the case.
I
Hello Bruno,
Thanks for you suggestion.
But in our use case there are large no. of fields so every time making copy
field will not feasible.
i.e.: fields: ABC_Field/Start_Date, ABD_Field/Complete_Date,
ABD_Field/info/User_Name, ABD_Field/info/Email
As we use in return field i.e.:
Hello,
I'm trying to perform the following query with edismax parser and
sub-queries of edismax type.
f.f3.qf=...
f.f4.qf=...
f.f5.qf=...
((_query_:{!edismax qf="abstracts abstract_background abstract_objective
abstract_methods abstract_results abstract_conclusions abstracts_names
Am 05.12.18 um 17:11 schrieb Walter Underwood:
I’ve never heard a recommendation to have three times as much RAM as the heap.
That doesn’t make sense to me.
https://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPerformanceProblems#RAM
You might need 3X as much disk space as the index size.
For RAM, it is
20 matches
Mail list logo
