Hi!
I'm wondering if there's any possibility to tell the current collection to
use a library stored in the blobstore using the solrconfig.xml instead of
having to do a /config request.
Same way local filesystem libraries are added in solrconfig, it could exist
for blobstore libraries. Since it's
Hi folks!
I'm studying the migration process from our current solr 3.6 multitenant
cluster (single master, multiple slaves) setup to a solrcloud 4.10.3 but I
have a a question about the tlog.
First of all, I will try to give some context:
- 1 single master and N slaves.
- around 300
wrote:
On 12/30/2014 2:16 AM, Samuel García Martínez wrote:
I'm studying the migration process from our current solr 3.6 multitenant
cluster (single master, multiple slaves) setup to a solrcloud 4.10.3 but
I
have a a question about the tlog.
First of all, I will try to give some context
with the exact same size 32792 [default
buffer size]):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/4740964/solr_references.png
Can you give any hint on how to read this kind of reference graph?
Thanks!
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Samuel García Martínez
samuelgmarti...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the quick
Hi all, we are facing a high memory usage in our Solr 3.6 master (not in
the slaves) even during idle (non indexing) periods.
container: Tomcat 6.0.29
maxthreads: 1.5k (i think this setting is wrong, 300 would be enough)
solr: solr 3.6.0
setup: multitenant environment with 120+ cores and near 5M
probably seeing uncollected
memory.
Best
Erick
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Samuel García Martínez
samuelgmarti...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, we are facing a high memory usage in our Solr 3.6 master (not in
the slaves) even during idle (non indexing) periods.
container: Tomcat 6.0.29
Hi all, we are getting some facet (faceting a multivalued field) values
with 0 results using *:* query. I think this is really strange, since we
are using MatchAllQuery there is no way we can get 0 results in any value.
That 0 results values were present in the index before the reindex we made.
PM, Samuel García Martínez
samuelgmarti...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, we are getting some facet (faceting a multivalued field) values
with 0 results using *:* query. I think this is really strange, since we
are using MatchAllQuery there is no way we can get 0 results in any value.
That 0
First of all, if you stem on indexing and you don't on query time, your
queries wont find anything valuable.
This is an easy approach. If you want full term (no stemmed) matches were
boosted you have to query like:
?q=data managementdefType=edismaxqf=*name_without_stemming^200* name^100
text
whops! Jack got it faster :D
Sorry for double posting.
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:41 PM, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.comwrote:
You may want to do a copyfield and have one field that is stemmed for
casual matches at a lower boost while one is unstemmed and boosted higher.
You could
Hi all, i have a question about boosting a given doc based on query terms
proximity.
*query*: dog food*doc1*: my dog eat food*doc2*: i have purchased
the dog food on amazon paying with paypal
Current scoring tf/idf algorithm scores higher doc1 because length
normalization.
Is there any method
I just read the edismax pf functionality and it covers all my needs.
Many thanks :)
2012/3/19 Samuel García Martínez samuelgmarti...@gmail.com
Hi all, i have a question about boosting a given doc based on query terms
proximity.
*query*: dog food*doc1*: my dog eat food*doc2*: i have
Is it possible that your Solr client (or the way you communicate with it)
is aware of HTTP caching?
If you are using a navigator in order to confirm these updates and commits,
try disabling HTTP caching.
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.comwrote:
Are you sure
You are using the uncomitted FieldCollapse component for 1.4.x.
Now, on 3.x field collapse component is not that anymore. You must remove
it and configure the out-of-the-box one.
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Vadim Kisselmann
v.kisselm...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
comment out the lines
AFAIK, FieldValueCache is only used for faceting on tokenized fields.
Maybe, are you getting confused with FieldCache (
http://lucene.apache.org/java/3_0_2/api/all/org/apache/lucene/search/FieldCache.html)?
This is used for common facets (using facet.method=fc and not tokenized
fields).
This
Hi, i think what you are looking for is *nested facets* or *
HierarchicalFaceting http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HierarchicalFaceting*
*
*
Category A - Subcategory A1
Category A - Subcategory A1
Category B - Subcategory A1
Category B - Subcategory B2
Category A - Subcategory A2
Faceting by Category:
16 matches
Mail list logo
