Jumping in late here, but if you're interested, we're currently
implementing a LCF connector for couchdb at JTeam (http://www.jteam.nl)
. We'll make it available on line and try to contribute it back to LCF.
We'll also soon publish a blog post about it as an example of how to
develop custom
Hi All,
On 17th February we'll host the first Dutch Lucene User Group Meetup.
This meet-up will be split into two parts:
- The first part will be dedicated to the user group itself. We'll have
an introduction to the members and have an open discussion about the
goals of the user group and
(s)
Don't think relational.
I wrote this 2 years ago:
http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=50711#272351
Fuad Efendi
+1 416-993-2060
http://www.tokenizer.ca/
-Original Message-
From: Uri Boness [mailto:ubon...@gmail.com]
Sent: January-21-10 11:35 AM
To: solr-user
In addition, the biggest appealing feature in Compass is that it's
transactional and therefore integrates well with your infrastructure
(Spring/EJB, Hibernate, JPA, etc...). This obviously is nice for some
systems (not very large scale ones) and the programming model is clean.
On the other
There seems to be an implication that compass wont scale as well as solr - and
I'm not sure that's true at all. They will both scale as well as the underlying
Lucene.
Lucene doesn't handle distributed search or replication out of the box,
you have to implement it using some of it's features
If you're using DataImportHandler than this can easily be done with a
TemplateTranformer. Otherwise, if you really must do it in Solr you can
write your own custom UpdateProcessor and plug it in:
DIH TemplateTransformer:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DataImportHandler#TemplateTransformer
Yes, you can tag filters using the new local params format and then
explicitly exclude them when providing the facet fields. see:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SimpleFacetParameters#Tagging_and_excluding_Filters
Cheers,
Uri
Mat Brown wrote:
Hi all,
Just wondering if it's possible to do filter
Just updated SOLR-1625 to support regexp hints.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1625
Cheers,
Uri
Chris Hostetter wrote:
: In my web application I want to set up auto-suggest as you type
: functionality which will search case-insensitively yet return the original
: case terms. It
You can actually define boost queries to do that (bq parameter). Boost
queries accept the standard Lucene query syntax and eventually appended
to the user query. Just make sure that the default operator is set to OR
other wise these boost queries will not only influence the boosts but
also
, BooleanClause.Occur.SHOULD);...
There is one case where query.add((BooleanClause) c); is used though.
Erik
On Dec 5, 2009, at 6:54 AM, Uri Boness wrote:
You can actually define boost queries to do that (bq parameter).
Boost queries accept the standard Lucene query syntax and eventually
query.add((BooleanClause) c); is used though.
Erik
On Dec 5, 2009, at 6:54 AM, Uri Boness wrote:
You can actually define boost queries to do that (bq parameter).
Boost queries accept the standard Lucene query syntax and eventually
appended to the user query. Just make sure that the default
Hi All,
For those who are interested, the official Lucid Solr trainings are now
available in Europe. The first training - Introduction to Solr is a 3
days training covering the basics and some of the more advance features
of Solr. It is scheduled for 30th November (till 2nd December) and will
Hi,
It seems the the latest lucene libraries are not up to date in the Solr
maven repo
(http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-repository/org/apache/solr/solr-lucene-core/1.4-SNAPSHOT/)
Can we expect them to be updated soon?
Cheers,
Uri
If you wish to save yourself from the hassle of applying the patch, you
can also download it from http://www.jteam.nl/news/solrexplorer
Uri
Grant Ingersoll wrote:
There is also a GWT contribution in JIRA that is pretty handy and will
likely be added in 1.5. See
If the threshold is only 10, why can't you always sort by popularity and
if the result set is 10 then resort on the client side based on
date_entered?
Uri
Bojan Šmid wrote:
Hi all,
I need to perform sorting of my query hits by different criterion depending
on the number of hits. For
Hi,
At the moment I think the most appropriate place to put it is in the
AbstractDocumentCollapser (in the getCollapseInfo method). Though, it
might not be the most efficient.
Cheers,
Uri
Joe Calderon wrote:
hello all, i have a question on the field collapsing patch, say i have
an integer
is that, if we use multicore it forces you to use a core
name. this is inconvenient. We must get rid of this restriction before
we move single-core to multicore.
On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Uri Boness ubon...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
Can you add a JIRA issue for that so we can vote for it?
Chris Hostetter
and you have to do this instead.
Shalin Shekhar Mangar wrote:
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Uri Boness ubon...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it really a problem? I mean, as i see it, solr to cores is what RDBMS is
to databases. When you connect to a database you also need to specify the
database name
+1
Can you add a JIRA issue for that so we can vote for it?
Chris Hostetter wrote:
: For the record: even if you're only going to have one SOlrCore, using the
: multicore support (ie: having a solr.xml file) might prove handy from a
: maintence standpoint ... the ability to configure new on
Not having any facet and Not using a filter cache are two different
things. If you're not using query filters, you can still have facet
calculated and returned as part of the search result. The facet
component uses lucene's field cache to retrieve values for the facet field.
Jonathan Ariel
values by default?
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 3:58 AM, Uri Boness ubon...@gmail.com wrote:
You can check out http://www.ilocal.nl. If you search for a bank in
Amsterdam then you'll see that a lot of the results are collapsed. For
this
we used an older version of this patch (which works
not ideal.
At the time (many months ago) there was no way to account for this but
it sounds like this patch could make it possible, maybe.
Thanks!
--
Steve
On Sep 5, 2009, at 5:57 AM, Uri Boness wrote:
There's work on the patch that is being done now which will enable
you to ask for specific field
If I recall correctly, in solr 1.3 there was an issue where filters
didn't really behaved as they should have. Basically, if you had a query
and filters defined, the query would have executed normally and only
after that the filter would be applied. AFAIK this is fixed in 1.4 where
now the
Hi,
This is a bit tricky but I think you can achieve it as follows:
1. have a field called location_facet which holds the logical path of
the location for each address (e.g. /Eurpoe/England/London)
2. have another multi valued filed location_search that holds all the
locations - your catchall
you know any live site using field collapsing already?
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Uri Boness ubon...@gmail.com wrote:
There's work on the patch that is being done now which will enable you to
ask for specific field values of the collapsed documents using a
dedicated
request
data?
What is the latest build that is safe to use on a production environment?
I'd probably go for that and use field collapsing.
Thank you very much.
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 4:49 AM, Uri Boness ubon...@gmail.com wrote:
The collapsed documents are represented by one master document which can
collapsing already?
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 5:57 PM, Uri Boness ubon...@gmail.com wrote:
There's work on the patch that is being done now which will enable you to
ask for specific field values of the collapsed documents using a dedicated
request parameter. This work is not committed yet
The development on this patch is quite active. It works well for single
solr instance, but distributed search (ie. shards) is not yet supported.
Using this page you can group search results based on a specific field.
There are two flavors of field collapsing - adjacent and non-adjacent,
the
have to try some of the old patches, but I'm not
sure about their stability.
cheers,
Uri
R. Tan wrote:
Thanks Uri. How does paging and scoring work when using field collapsing?
What patch works with 1.3? Is it production ready?
R
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Uri Boness ubon...@gmail.com
you can use LukeRequestHandler http://localhost:8983/solr/admin/luke
Marc Sturlese wrote:
Hey there,
I need a query to get the total number of documents in my index. I can get
if I do this using DismaxRequestHandler:
q.alt=*:*facet=falsehl=falserows=0
I have noticed this query is very memory
Function queries is what you need: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery
Paul Tomblin wrote:
Every document I put into Solr has a field origScore which is a
floating point number between 0 and 1 that represents a score assigned
by the program that generated the document. I would like it
Hi,
You know the level your currently in:
America/USA
You have the values for the location facet in the form:
America/USA/NYC/Chelsea...3
America/USA/NYC/East Village2
America/USA/San Francisco/Haight-Ashbury...5
America/USA/Los
Hi,
The search index is flat. There are no hierarchies in there. Now, I'm
not sure what you're referring to with this type of objects. But if
you refer to having different types of documents in one index (and
schema) that's certainly possible. You can define all the fields that
you expect in
Hi,
Where can I find general statistics about the Solr project. The only
thing I found is statistics about the Lucene project at:
http://people.apache.org/~vgritsenko/stats/projects/lucene.html#Downloads-N1008F
Now the question is whether these number include all lucene's
sub-projects
Hi,
We started a new Lucene user group in The Netherlands. In the last
couple of years we've notice an increasing demand and interest in Lucene
and Solr. We thought it's about time to have a centralize place where
people can have open discussions, trainings, and periodic meet-ups to
share
, Uri Boness wrote:
Hi,
Where can I find general statistics about the Solr project. The only
thing I found is statistics about the Lucene project at:
http://people.apache.org/~vgritsenko/stats/projects/lucene.html#Downloads-N1008F
Now the question is whether these number include all lucene's
I guess if you have stored=true then there is no problem.
2. If you don't use stored=true you can still get access to term vectors,
which you can probably reuse to create fake field with same term vector in
an updated document... just an idea, may be I am wrong...
Reconstructing a the field
Not in the same core. You can define multiple cores where each core is a
separate solr instance except they all run within one container. each
core has its own index, schema and configuration. If you want to compare
it to databases, then I guess a core is to Solr Server what a database
is to
to query against?
Thanks!
Khai
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Uri Boness ubon...@gmail.com wrote:
Not in the same core. You can define multiple cores where each core is a
separate solr instance except they all run within one container. each core
has its own index, schema and configuration
)).
To understand the schema better, you can read
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SchemaXml
Uri
last...@gmail.com wrote:
Uri Boness wrote:
Well... yes, it's a tool the Nutch ships with. It also ships with an
example Solr schema which you can use.
hi,
is there any documentation to understand what going
It seems to me that this configuration actually does what you want -
queries on title mostly. The default search field doesn't influence a
dismax query. I would suggest you to include the debugQuery=true
parameter, it will help you figure out how the matching is performed.
You can read more
Well... yes, it's a tool the Nutch ships with. It also ships with an
example Solr schema which you can use.
Fuad Efendi wrote:
Thanks for the link, so, SolrIndex is NOT plugin, it is an application... I
use similar approach...
-Original Message-
From: Uri Boness
Hi,
Nutch comes
Hi,
This is a very strange behavior and the fact that it is cause by one
specific field, again, leads me to believe it's still a data issue. Did
you try using SolrJ to query the data as well? If the same thing happens
when using the binary protocol, then it's probably not a data issue. On
How did you configure nutch?
Make sure you have the parse-html and index-basic configured. The
HtmlParser should by default extract the page title and add to the
parsed data, and the BasicIndexingFilter by default adds this title to
the NutchDocument and stores it in the title filed. All the
I can think of ways to tackle your problem:
Option 1: each document will have a field indicating its language. Then,
when searching, you can simply filter the query on the language you're
searching on. Advantages: everything is in one index, so if in the
future you will need to do a cross
It can very well be an issue with the data itself. For example, if the
data contains un-escaped characters which invalidates the response. I
don't know much about ruby, but what do you get with wt=json?
Rupert Fiasco wrote:
I am seeing our responses getting truncated if and only if I search
Another solution is to use hierachical values. So for example, instead
of having a Barack Obama value you'll have person/Barak Obama. To
filter on a person you can just use wildcards (e.g. person/*).
Asif Rahman wrote:
Is there any way to assign metadata to terms in a field and then filter on
Hi,
1. that change you made should work. Just remember that request
parameters (query string parameters) override the configured defaults.
2. That is correct
3. not quite sure what you mean by that.
4. I guess you're asking in your statement is correct... it is.
I think you should have a look
you can try using the field collapse patch (currently in JIRA). You'll
probably need to manually extract the patch code and apply it yourself
as its latest update only applies to an earlier version of solr (1.3-dev).
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-236
Cheers,
Uri
Marcus Herou
Hi,
I've noticed that currently the SynonymFilter replaces the original
token with the configured tokens list (which includes the original
matched token) and each one of these tokens is of type word. Wouldn't
it make more sense to only mark the original token as type word and
the the other
I guess, to generalize the idea, is to have some support for aggregation
functions. average anyone ;-) ? It would also be very useful to be able
to define the field that is being aggregated. For example, in a flight
reservation web site we developed we needed to show facets on different
flight
Hi,
I'm actually quite interested in this feature. What is the ranking
strategy for the group? is it based on the highest ranking document with
in the group? is it configurable?
cheers,
Uri
oleg_gnatovskiy wrote:
Yes, that is the patch I am trying to get to work. It doesn't have a feature
52 matches
Mail list logo
