Retrieve DocIdSet from Query in lucene 5.x

I am trying to migrate some old code that used to retrieve DocIdSets from filters, but with Filters being deprecated in Lucene 5.x I am trying to move away from those classes but I'm not sure the right way to do this now. Are there any examples of doing this?

Re: Custom StoredFieldVisitor in Solr

fields that particular user shouldn't be able to see. On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Rick Leir <rl...@leirtech.com> wrote: > Jamie, what is the use case? Cheers -- Rick > > On August 23, 2017 11:30:38 AM MDT, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >I thoug

Custom StoredFieldVisitor in Solr

I thought I had asked this previously, but I can't find reference to it now. I am interested in using a custom StoredFieldVisitor in Solr and after spelunking through the code for a little it seems that there is no easy extension point that supports me doing so. I am currently on Solr 4.x

Re: Custom handler/content stream loader

/example-DIH/solr/db/ > conf/managed-schema#L625 > > Regards, > Alex. > > Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates: > http://www.solr-start.com/ > > > On 24 August 2016 at 04:22, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I

Re: Custom handler/content stream loader

this is the best way, but I wonder given the inability to plugin a custom request writer (or something similar). Am I barking up the wrong tree? On Aug 23, 2016 5:22 PM, "Jamie Johnson" <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have a need to build custom field types that store additional metadata &

Custom handler/content stream loader

I have a need to build custom field types that store additional metadata at the field level in a payload. I was thinking that I could satisfy this by building a custom UpdateRequest that captured this additional information in XML, but I am not really sure how to get at this additional

Re: Escaping characters in a nested query

do field > is not necessary ie q=foo +bar {!lucene > v=$subq}=my_awesome:less%20pain& > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > When using nested queries of the form q=_query_:"my_awesome:query", what > > ne

Escaping characters in a nested query

When using nested queries of the form q=_query_:"my_awesome:query", what needs to be escaped in the query portion? Just using the admin UI the following works _query_:"+field\\:with\\:special" _query_:"+field\\:with\\~special" _query_:"+field\\:with\\" but the same doesn't work for quotes, i.e.

Solr InputFormat Exist?

Is there an equivalent of the ESInputFormat ( https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch-hadoop/blob/03c056142a5ab7422b81bb1f519fd67a9581405f/mr/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/hadoop/mr/EsInputFormat.java) in Solr or is there any work that is planned in this regard? -Jamie

Re: Add support in FacetsComponent for facet.method=uif

uif. What is the > difference? > > On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 6:44 AM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > For those interested I created a separate jira issue for this but forgot > to > > attach earlier. > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/brow

Re: Add support in FacetsComponent for facet.method=uif

to have dv and uif in there.? > > On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The patch adds facet.method=uif and then delegates all of the work to the > > JSON Faceting API to do the work. I had originally added a > facet.method=dv >

Re: Add support in FacetsComponent for facet.method=uif

the facet > fields to DocValues and our faceting is slow. > > Please... > > On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Is there any interest in this? While i think it's important and inline > > with faceting available in the new

Re: Add support in FacetsComponent for facet.method=uif

which is prefer to not need to maintain separately. Jamie On Dec 22, 2015 12:37 PM, "Jamie Johnson" <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > I had previously piggybacked on another post, but I think it may have been > lost there. I had a need to do UnInvertedField based faceting in

Re: Adding the same field value question

Yes the field is multi valued On Dec 28, 2015 3:48 PM, "Jack Krupansky" <jack.krupan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is the field multivalued? > > -- Jack Krupansky > > On Sun, Dec 27, 2015 at 11:16 PM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > What is

Re: Adding the same field value question

ecause that'll just > increase the size of your index without providing any real benefits at > query time. > For increasing the scores, boosting is definitely the way to go. > > On Mon, 28 Dec 2015, 09:46 Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > What is the diffe

Re: Solr - facet fields that contain other facet fields

Can you do the opposite? Index into an unanalyzed field and copy into the analyzed? If I remember correctly facets are based off of indexed values so if you tokenize the field then the facets will be as you are seeing now. On Dec 28, 2015 9:45 AM, "Kevin Lopez" wrote:

Adding the same field value question

What is the difference of adding a field with the same value twice or adding it once and boosting the field on add? Is there a situation where one approach is preferred? Jamie

Limit fields returned in solr based on content

I have what I believe is a unique requirement discussed here in the past to limit data sent to users based on some marking in the field.

Re: Limit fields returned in solr based on content

Sorry hit send too early Is there a mechanism in solr/lucene that allows customization of the fields returned that would have access to the field content and payload? On Dec 24, 2015 4:15 PM, "Jamie Johnson" <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have what I believe is a unique re

Re: Limit fields returned in solr based on content

efield], and your MyFieldDocTransformer makes the > > decision as to whether or not to include somefield in the output. > > > > This would of course, require some Java coding. > > > > Upayavira > > > > On Thu, Dec 24, 2015, at 09:17 PM, Jamie Johnson wrote: &g

Re: Limit fields returned in solr based on content

e fl=[my-filter:somefield], and your MyFieldDocTransformer makes the > decision as to whether or not to include somefield in the output. > > This would of course, require some Java coding. > > Upayavira > > On Thu, Dec 24, 2015, at 09:17 PM, Jamie Johnson wrote: > > Sorry hit

Add support in FacetsComponent for facet.method=uif

I had previously piggybacked on another post, but I think it may have been lost there. I had a need to do UnInvertedField based faceting in the FacetsComponent and as such started looking at what would be required to implement something similar to what the JSON Facets based API does in this

Re: facet component and uninverted field

Thanks, the issue I'm having is that there is no equivalent to method uif for the standard facet component. We'll see how SOLR-8096 shakes out. On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 20, 2015, at 01:32 PM, Jamie Johnson wrote

Re: facet component and uninverted field

For those interested I've attached an initial patch to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8096 to start supporting uif in FacetComponent via JSON facet api. On Dec 18, 2015 9:22 PM, "Jamie Johnson" <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > I recently saw that the new JSON

Re: faceting is unusable slow since upgrade to 5.3.0

Bill, Check out the patch attached to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8096. I had considered making the method uif after I had done most of the work, it would be trivial to change and would probably be more aligned with not adding unexpected changes to people that are currently using

Re: faceting is unusable slow since upgrade to 5.3.0

Can we still specify the cache implementation for the field cache? When this change occurred to faceting (uninverting reader vs field ) it prevented us from moving to 5.x but if we can get the 4.x functionality using that api we could look to port to the latest. Jamie On Dec 17, 2015 9:18 AM,

Re: faceting is unusable slow since upgrade to 5.3.0

Also can we get the capability to choose the method of faceting in the older faceting component? I'm not looking for complete feature parity just the ability to specify the method. As always thanks. On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 8:04 AM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > Can

facet component and uninverted field

I recently saw that the new JSON Facet API supports controlling the facet method that is used and was wondering if there was any support for doing the same thing in the original facet component? Also is there a plan to deprecate one of these components over the other or is there an expectation

Re: Append fields to a document

t; http://www.solr-start.com/ > > > On 16 December 2015 at 22:09, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I have a use case where we only need to append some fields to a document. > > To retrieve the full representation is very expensive but I can easily > get > &

Append fields to a document

I have a use case where we only need to append some fields to a document. To retrieve the full representation is very expensive but I can easily get the deltas. Is it possible to just add fields to an existing Solr document? I experimented with using overwrite=false, but that resulted in two

SOLR-7996

Has anyone looked at this issue? I'd be willing to take a stab at it if someone could provide some high level design guidance. This would be a critical piece preventing us from moving to version 5. Jamie

Re: Child document and parent document with same key

Thanks that's what I suspected given what I'm seeing but wanted to make sure. Again thanks On Nov 5, 2015 1:08 PM, "Mikhail Khludnev" <mkhlud...@griddynamics.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Is th

Re: Child document and parent document with same key

What you've got if you actually try to do this? > > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I am looking at using child documents and noticed that if I specify a > child > > and parent with the same key solr indexes this fine and I

Payload doesn't apply to WordDelimiterFilterFactory-generated tokens

I came across this post ( http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Payload-doesn-t-apply-to-WordDelimiterFilterFactory-generated-tokens-td3136748.html) and tried to find a JIRA for this task. Was one ever created? If not I'd be happy to create it if this is still something that makes sense or if

Re: Order of actions in Update request

Yes if they are in separate requests I imagine it would work though I haven't tested. I was wondering if there was a way to execute these actions in a single request and maintain order. On Oct 24, 2015 3:25 PM, "Shawn Heisey" <apa...@elyograg.org> wrote: > On 10/24/2015 5:2

Order of actions in Update request

Looking at the code and jira I see that ordering actions in solrj update request is currently not supported but I'd like to know if there is any other way to get this capability. I took a quick look at the XML loader and it appears to process actions as it sees them so if the order was changed to

Child document and parent document with same key

I am looking at using child documents and noticed that if I specify a child and parent with the same key solr indexes this fine and I can retrieve both documents separately. Is this expected to work? -Jamie

SolrCloud NoAuth for /unrelatednode error

I am getting an error that essentially says solr does not have auth for /unrelatednode/... I would be ok with the error being displayed, but I think this may be what is causing my solr instances to be shown as down. Currently I'm issuing the following command

Re: SolrCloud NoAuth for /unrelatednode error

Ah please ignore, it looks like this was totally unrelated and my issue was configuration related On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am getting an error that essentially says solr does not have auth for > /unrelatednode/... I would be ok wi

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

No worries, thanks again I'll begin teaching this On Mon, Aug 31, 2015, 5:16 PM Tomás Fernández Löbbe <tomasflo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry Jamie, I totally missed this email. There was no Jira that I could > find. I created SOLR-7996 > > On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 5:26 AM, J

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

Tracking not teaching... Auto complete is fun... On Tue, Sep 1, 2015, 6:34 AM Jamie Johnson <jej2...@gmail.com> wrote: > No worries, thanks again I'll begin teaching this > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015, 5:16 PM Tomás Fernández Löbbe <tomasflo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >&

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

/FieldCacheImpl but you could perhaps wrap what is cached there to either screen out stuff or construct a new entry based on the user. -Yonik On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I think a custom UnInvertingReader would work as I could skip the process

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

thanks. On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: This sounds like a good idea, I'm assuming I'd need to make my own UnInvertingReader (or subclass) to do this right? Is there a way to do this on the 5.x codebase or would I still need the solrindexer factory work

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

either subclass or re-implement UnInvertingReader though. -Yonik On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Also in this vein I think that Lucene should support factories for the cache creation as described @ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2394

Re: StrDocValues

might be done after everything was completed, but it looks like it was executed before faceting which is great. On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Yonik. I currently am using this to negate the score of a document given the value of a particular field

Re: StrDocValues

Seeley ysee...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I don't see it explicitly mentioned, but does the boost only get applied to the final documents/score that matched the provided query or is it called for each field that matched? I'm

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

for advanced use cases. Tomás On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry to poke this again but I'm not following the last comment of how I could go about extending the solr index searcher and have the extension used. Is there an example of this? Again thanks

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry to poke this again but I'm not following the last comment of how I could go about extending the solr index searcher and have the extension used. Is there an example of this? Again thanks Jamie On Aug 25, 2015 7:18 AM

Re: StrDocValues

Right, I am removing them myself. Another feature which would be great would be the ability to specify a custom collector like the positive score only collector in this case to avoid having to do an extra pass over all of the scores, but I don't believe there is a way to do that now right? On

StrDocValues

Are there any example implementation showing how StrDocValues works? I am not sure if this is the right place or not, but I was thinking about having some document level doc value that I'd like to read in a function query to impact if the document is returned or not. Am I barking up the right

Re: StrDocValues

I think I found it. {!boost..} gave me what i was looking for and then a custom collector filtered out anything that I didn't want to show. On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Are there any example implementation showing how StrDocValues works? I am

Re: StrDocValues

, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I think I found it. {!boost..} gave me what i was looking for and then a custom collector filtered out anything that I didn't want to show. On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Are there any example implementation showing

Re: Tokenizers and DelimitedPayloadTokenFilterFactory

not sure how generally useful this would be, and if it comes at a cost to normal searching there's sure to be lively discussion. Best Erick On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like I have something basic working for Trie fields. I am doing exactly

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

Sorry to poke this again but I'm not following the last comment of how I could go about extending the solr index searcher and have the extension used. Is there an example of this? Again thanks Jamie On Aug 25, 2015 7:18 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I had seen this as well, if I

Re: Tokenizers and DelimitedPayloadTokenFilterFactory

25, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to specify a particular payload for all tokens emitted from a tokenizer, but don't see a clear way to do this. Ideally I could specify that something like the DelimitedPayloadTokenFilter be run on the entire field

Tokenizers and DelimitedPayloadTokenFilterFactory

I would like to specify a particular payload for all tokens emitted from a tokenizer, but don't see a clear way to do this. Ideally I could specify that something like the DelimitedPayloadTokenFilter be run on the entire field and then standard analysis be done on the rest of the field, so in the

Re: Tokenizers and DelimitedPayloadTokenFilterFactory

PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Right, I had assumed (obviously here is my problem) that I'd be able to specify payloads for the field regardless of the field type. Looking at TrieField that is certainly non-trivial. After a bit of digging it appears that if I wanted to do something

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

I had seen this as well, if I over wrote this by extending SolrIndexSearcher how do I have my extension used? I didn't see a way that could be plugged in. On Aug 25, 2015 7:15 AM, Mikhail Khludnev mkhlud...@griddynamics.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com

Re: how to prevent uuid-field changing in /update query?

It sounds like you need to control when the uuid is and is not created, just feels like you'd get better mileage doing this outside of solr On Aug 25, 2015 7:49 AM, CrazyDiamond crazy_diam...@mail.ru wrote: Why not generate the uuid client side on the initial save and reuse this on updates? i

Re: how to prevent uuid-field changing in /update query?

Why not generate the uuid client side on the initial save and reuse this on updates? On Aug 25, 2015 4:22 AM, CrazyDiamond crazy_diam...@mail.ru wrote: i have uuid field. it is not set as unique, but nevertheless i want it not to be changed every time when i call /update. it might be because

Re: how to prevent uuid-field changing in /update query?

I am honestly not familiar enough to say. Best to try it On Aug 25, 2015 7:59 AM, CrazyDiamond crazy_diam...@mail.ru wrote: It sounds like you need to control when the uuid is and is not created, just feels like you'd get better mileage doing this outside of solr Can I simply insert a

Re: Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

requirement. On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 3:50 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: as mentioned in a previous email I have a need to provide security controls at the term level. I know that Lucene/Solr doesn't support this so I had baked something onto a 4.x baseline that was sufficient

Re: Tokenizers and DelimitedPayloadTokenFilterFactory

a custom type that incorporates payloads for, say, trie fields will be interesting to say the least. Numeric types are packed to save storage etc. so it'll be an adventure.. Best, Erick On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: We were originally using

Re: Tokenizers and DelimitedPayloadTokenFilterFactory

talking about the same thing ;) Best, Erick On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to specify a particular payload for all tokens emitted from a tokenizer, but don't see a clear way to do this. Ideally I could specify

Re: Disable caching

cache. I don't see anyway to override this cache or augment the key in anyway, am I missing an extension point here? Is there another approach I should be taking in this case? On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: This was my original thought. We already have

Lucene/Solr 5.0 and custom FieldCahe implementation

as mentioned in a previous email I have a need to provide security controls at the term level. I know that Lucene/Solr doesn't support this so I had baked something onto a 4.x baseline that was sufficient for my use cases. I am now looking to move that implementation to 5.x and am running into an

Re: Geospatial Predicate Question

only makes sense for non-point indexed data. ~ David On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 6:02 PM Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Can someone clarify the difference between isWithin and Contains in regards to Solr's spatial support? From https://wiki.apache.org/solr

Re: Disable caching

This was my original thought. We already have the thread local so should be straight fwd to just wrap the Field name and use that as the key. Again thanks, I really appreciate the feedback On Aug 19, 2015 8:12 AM, Yonik Seeley ysee...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Jamie

Re: Disable caching

, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks, I'll try to delve into this. We are currently using the parent query parser, within we could use {!secure} I think. Ultimately I would want the solr qparser to actually do the work of parsing and I'd just wrap that. Right

Re: Disable caching

the document which I think we wouldn't have to do anything to the caches but our customer has pushed back on this in the past. On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Yonik Seeley ysee...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, my use case

Re: Disable caching

to me what to do in the qparser once I have the user auths though. Again thanks, this is really good stuff. On Aug 18, 2015 8:54 PM, Yonik Seeley ysee...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:38 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I really like this idea in concept. My query would

Disable caching

I see that if Solr is in realtime mode that caching is disable within the SolrIndexSearcher that is created in SolrCore, but is there anyway to disable caching without being in realtime mode? Currently I'm implementing a NoOp cache that implements SolrCache but returns null for everything and

Re: Disable caching

that are more at the lucene level and can't be disabled. Can I ask what you are trying to prevent from being cached and why? Different caches are for different things, so it would seem to be an odd usecase to disable them all. Security? -Yonik On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2

Re: Disable caching

. On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Yonik Seeley ysee...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: when you say a security filter, are you asking if I can express my security constraint as a query? If that is the case then the answer

Re: phonetic filter factory question

output mark, you will see all the offsets and can easily confirm the detailed behavior for yourself. Regards, Alex. Solr Analyzers, Tokenizers, Filters, URPs and even a newsletter: http://www.solr-start.com/ On 15 August 2015 at 12:22, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: The JavaDoc

phonetic filter factory question

The JavaDoc says that the PhoneticFilterFactory will inject tokens with an offset of 0 into the stream. I'm assuming this means an offset of 0 from the token that it is analyzing, is that right? I am trying to collapse some of my schema, I currently have a text field that I use for general

Geospatial Predicate Question

Can someone clarify the difference between isWithin and Contains in regards to Solr's spatial support? From https://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrAdaptersForLuceneSpatial4 I see that if you are using point data you should use Intersects, but it is not clear when to use isWithin and contains. My guess

Re: Filtering documents using payloads

at 7:35 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I am attempting to put together a DocsAndPositionsEnum that can hide terms given the payload on the term. The idea is that if a term has a particular access control and the user does not I don't want it to be visible. I have based this off

Filtering documents using payloads

I am attempting to put together a DocsAndPositionsEnum that can hide terms given the payload on the term. The idea is that if a term has a particular access control and the user does not I don't want it to be visible. I have based this off of

PayloadSpanOrQuery

I have a need for doing using payloads in a SpanOrQuery to influence the score. I noticed that there is no PayloadSpanOrQuery so I'd like to implement one. I couldn't find a ticket in JIRA for this so I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6706, if this feature exists I will

Specifying multiple query parsers

I have a use case where I want to use the block join query parser for the top level query and for the nested portion a custom query parser. I was originally doing this, which worked {!parent which='type:parent'}_query_:{!myqp df='child_pay' v='value foo'} but switched to this which also worked

Re: Specifying multiple query parsers

Sorry answered my own question. For those that are interested this is related to how BlockJoinParentQParser handles sub queries and looks like it's working as it should. On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I have a use case where I want to use the block join

Re: Scoring, payloads and phrase queries

...@griddynamics.com wrote: Does PayloadNearQuery suite for it? On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a way to consider payloads for scoring in phrase queries like exists in PayloadTermQuery? -- Sincerely yours Mikhail Khludnev Principal Engineer

Scoring, payloads and phrase queries

Is there a way to consider payloads for scoring in phrase queries like exists in PayloadTermQuery?

Re: Scoring, payloads and phrase queries

looks like there is nothing that exists in this regard and there is no jira ticket that I could find. Is this something that there is any other interest in? Is this something that a ticket should be created for? On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote

Re: Using payloads and user provided data in score

that. Best, Erick On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 7:30 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry for being vague, I'll try to explain more. In my use case a particular field does not have a security control, it's the data in the field. So for instance if I had a schema with a field called name

Re: Using payloads and user provided data in score

so you don't have to specify them for each request. Best, Erick On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like this may be what I'm looking for *SolrRequestInfo* I have not tried this yet but looks promising. Assuming this works, thinking about

Using payloads and user provided data in score

I am looking for a way to prevent fields that users shouldn't be able to know exist from contributing to the score. The goal is to provide a way to essentially hide certain fields from requests based on an access level provided on the query. I have managed to make terms that users shouldn't be

Re: Using payloads and user provided data in score

, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I had thought about this in the past, but thought it might be too expensive. I guess in a search component I could look up all of the fields that are in the index and only run queries against fields they should be able to see once I know what is in the index

Re: Using payloads and user provided data in score

want to be careful about what copyFields you use. Best, Erick On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I am looking for a way to prevent fields that users shouldn't be able to know exist from contributing to the score. The goal is to provide a way

Re: Using payloads and user provided data in score

to rewrite a fielded query like +field:value possibly to something like +(field.secure:value field.secure2:value) Again thanks for suggestions On Jul 22, 2015 5:20 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I answered my own question, looks like the field infos are always read within the IndexSearcher so

Solr Block Join Query matching Parent documents that have multiple children

I have the following documents indexed response lst name=responseHeader int name=status0/int int name=QTime1/int /lst result name=response numFound=6 start=0 doc str name=type_sphysicalcharacteristics/str str name=test_haircolor_txtBlack/str str name=test_eyecolor_txtGreen/str /doc doc str

Sub Document question

I have not tried this as of yet, but is there any limitation to the nesting of documents? Specifically can sub documents have their own sub documents? Are there any practical limits on this or performance impacts from a search/indexing perspective to consider?

Re: Sub Document question

. On Dec 18, 2014 5:18 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I have not tried this as of yet, but is there any limitation to the nesting of documents? Specifically can sub documents have their own sub documents? Are there any practical limits on this or performance impacts from a search

DateMathParser question

I have found that DateMathParser is extremely useful in providing nice labels back to clients, but having to bring in all of solr-core to get it is causing us issues in our current implementation. Are there any thoughts about moving this to another jar (say solr-utils?) that would allow clients

Re: Commit Within and /update/extract handler

things but they have nothing to do with making docs visible :). See: http://searchhub.org/2013/08/23/understanding-transaction-logs-softcommit-and-commit-in-sorlcloud/ Best, Erick On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 8:43 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: Below is the log showing what I believe

Re: Commit Within and /update/extract handler

Thanks Shawn, I appreciate the information. On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Shawn Heisey s...@elyograg.org wrote: On 4/9/2014 7:47 AM, Jamie Johnson wrote: This is being triggered by adding the commitWithin param to ContentStreamUpdateRequest (request.setCommitWithin(1);). My

Re: Commit Within and /update/extract handler

: What does the call look like? Are you setting opening a new searcher or not? That should be in the log line where the commit is recorded... FWIW, Erick On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote: I'm running solr 4.6.0 and am noticing that commitWithin doesn't seem

Commit Within and /update/extract handler

I'm running solr 4.6.0 and am noticing that commitWithin doesn't seem to work when I am using the /update/extract request handler. It looks like a commit is happening from the logs, but the documents don't become available for search until I do a commit manually. Could this be some type of

SolrJ partial document updates

I would like to begin exploring partial document updates, but I have not seen any documentation that would indicate that SolrJ supports this, are there any documents describing how to do this or if it's even supported?

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >