On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Gregory Chanan gcha...@cloudera.com wrote:
{!raw f=foobar v=*} OR {!raw f=foobar v=a}
but this seems to give me the same results as the single-clause query.
Right... the query parser is detected as raw and the rest of the
value is used as the term (or rather it's
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 2:43 PM, youknow...@heroicefforts.net
youknow...@heroicefforts.net wrote:
Re-reading the documentation, it seems that Solr caches the results of the fq
parameter, not lower level field constraints. This would imply that breaking
a single complex boolean filter into
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Andreas Owen ao...@swissonline.ch wrote:
when i select a facet in thema_f all the others in the group disapear
OK, I see you're excluding filters tagged with thema_f when faceting
on the thema_f field.
str
Depending on requirements, another option for simple security is to
store the security info in the index and utilize a join. This really
only works when you have a single shard since joins aren't
distributed.
# the documents, with permissions
id:doc1, perms:public,...
id:doc2, perms:group1
Correct. This is only a limitation of embedding a local-params style
subquery within lucene syntax.
The parser, not knowing the syntax of the embedded query, currently
assumes the query text ends at whitespace or other special punctuation
such as ).
Original:
(({!join from=inner_id to=outer_id
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 10:22 AM, vit bulgako...@yahoo.com wrote:
Could someone explain me, please, the difference between addfield and
setfield in SolrInputDocument
addField will add another value to any existing values for the field.
setField will just overwrite anything that is already
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 7:14 PM, Greg Pendlebury
greg.pendleb...@gmail.com wrote:
My suspicion is that it won't work in parallel
Deep paging with cursorMark does work with distributed search
(assuming that's what you meant by parallel... querying sub-shards
in parallel?).
-Yonik
Perhaps so atomic updates work?
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.org - solve Solr GC pauses with off-heap filters
and fieldcache
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Michael Sokolov
msoko...@safaribooksonline.com wrote:
While upgrading from 4.2.1 to 4.6.1 I noticed that many of the fields
defined in the
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@heliosearch.com wrote:
I've been meaning to create a heliosearch 4x branch to get us a big
step closer to cutting a stable release. I should probably do that
sooner rather than later...
Done.
I've created branch helio which is based
term plans for a more stable release that would
be advisable for production use?
--Mike
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@heliosearch.com wrote:
Changes from the previous release are primarily off-heap FieldCache
support for strings as well as as all numerics (the previous
for a more stable release that would
be advisable for production use?
--Mike
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@heliosearch.com
wrote:
Changes from the previous release are primarily off-heap FieldCache
support for strings as well as as all numerics (the previous release
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Alexei Martchenko
ale...@martchenko.com.br wrote:
Chrome on Windows reports the latest Heliosearch as probable malware
Heh. Anyone know how to fix that?
I tried downloading with crome on my mac just now and it worked fine.
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.org -
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@heliosearch.com wrote:
I've been meaning to create a heliosearch 4x branch to get us a big
step closer to cutting a stable release. I should probably do that
sooner rather than later...
https://github.com/Heliosearch/heliosearch/issues/9
Changes from the previous release are primarily off-heap FieldCache
support for strings as well as as all numerics (the previous release
only had integer support).
Benchmarks for string fields here:
http://heliosearch.org/hs-solr-off-heap-fieldcache-performance
Try it out here:
Solr has extensive filtering tests.
The first step would be to double check that you see what you think
you are seeing, and then try and create an example to reproduce it.
For example, this works fine with the example data, and is of the
same form as your query:
http://localhost:8983/solr/query
I get a different error (but related to the same issue I guess) with
the following simple query:
/opt/code/heliosearch/solr$ curl -XPOST
http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*;
?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?
response
lst name=errorstr name=msgMust specify a Content-Type header
with POST
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 2:33 PM, Furkan KAMACI furkankam...@gmail.com wrote:
ConcurrentLRUCacheK,V class has that lines:
...
long oldestEntry = this.oldestEntry;
isCleaning = true;
this.oldestEntry = oldestEntry; // volatile write to make isCleaning
visible
...
What does that
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Shawn Heisey s...@elyograg.org wrote:
Do we have any idea whether this side effect of volatile access is part
of the Java specification
Yep, it's part of the JMM (Java Memory Model) and is guaranteed behavior.
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.org - native off-heap
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@heliosearch.com wrote:
You could try forcing things to go through function queries (via
pseudo-fields):
fl=field(id), field(myfield)
If you're not requesting any stored fields, that *might* currently
skip that step.
-Yonik
http
You could try forcing things to go through function queries (via pseudo-fields):
fl=field(id), field(myfield)
If you're not requesting any stored fields, that *might* currently
skip that step.
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.org - native off-heap filters and fieldcache for solr
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014
On Sun, Feb 23, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
shalinman...@gmail.com wrote:
I should clarify though that this optimization only works with fl=id,score.
Although it seems like it should be relatively simple to make it work
with other fields as well, by passing down the complete fl
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 1:34 AM, Nguyen Manh Tien
tien.nguyenm...@gmail.com wrote:
- *But after i index some docs and run softCommit or hardCommit with
openSearcher=false, number of SolrIndexSearcher increase by 1*
This is fine... it's more of an internal implementation detail (we
open what is
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 8:25 AM, m...@preselect-media.com wrote:
Is there any workaround to perform atomic updates on blocks or do I have to
re-index the parent document and all its children always again if I want to
update a field?
The latter, unfortunately.
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.org -
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 12:42 AM, Luis Lebolo luis.leb...@gmail.com wrote:
For this to
work, we concatenated all the id's into a single comma delimited value.
It doesn't sound like you need the resulting big value to be indexed.
All you need to do is retrieve it relatively quickly and do your
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 5:13 AM, Sohan Kalsariya
sohankalsar...@gmail.com wrote:
So in short i want to ask that Is it possible not to define the `distance`
parameter ? So I can get my desired results?
No, the distance parameter is required for geofilt.
If you are still looking to calculate
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Luis Lebolo luis.leb...@gmail.com wrote:
Update: It seems I get the bad behavior (no documents returned) when the
length of a value in the StrField is greater than or equal to 32,767
(2^15). Is this some type of bit overflow somewhere?
I believe that's the
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Joel Cohen joel.co...@bluefly.com wrote:
I'm trying to get the query time down to ~15 msec. Anyone have any tuning
recommendations?
I guess it depends on what the slowest part of the query currently is.
If you are faceting, it's often that.
Also, it's often a
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Joel Cohen joel.co...@bluefly.com wrote:
1. We are faceting. I'm not a developer so I'm not quite sure how we're
doing it. How can I measure?
Add debugQuery=true to the request and look at the timings of various
components.
2. I'm not sure how we'd force this
A new Heliosearch pre-release has been cut for people to try out:
https://github.com/Heliosearch/heliosearch/releases
Release Notes:
-
This is Heliosearch v0.03
Heliosearch is forked from Apache Solr and
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any guarantee in Solr/Lucene for the order of values in a stored
field?
Yes, order is preserved.
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.org -- off-heap filters for solr
Look at the StrUtils.splitSmart methods... the first variant treats
quotes specially,
the second variant doesn't (that's the one you probably want).
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.org -- off-heap filters for solr
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Shawn Heisey s...@elyograg.org wrote:
I have a Java
Update on the my initial performance findings for off-heap filters:
http://heliosearch.org/off-heap-filters/
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.org -- making solr shine
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Yonik Seeley ysee...@gmail.com wrote:
Off-Heap Filters:
JVMs have never been good at dealing
format can get the comparable gain
without changes in design?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5052
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 9:15 PM, Yonik Seeley ysee...@gmail.com wrote:
Update on the my initial performance findings for off-heap filters:
http://heliosearch.org/off-heap-filters
It's time to start working on the next major evolution of Solr (much
as we did years ago for the SolrCloud effort). To kick things off,
I've started a project on github and implemented off-heap filters,
as a first step toward taking performance to the next level.
For a number of reasons, we felt
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Ray Cheng rch...@rocketmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I have trouble configuring JoinQParserPlugin in Solr. I'm using solr-4.6.0.
I put this line (and only this line) to solrconfig.xml following Query
Parsers comments of solrconfig.xml (solr-4.6.0):
!-- example of
Does it mean the following line I added to solrconfig.xml is not needed and
caused Solr start error?
Yes. Join is a builtin parser and you should not add any config for it.
Most likely that is what is causing your startup error (although it's
not entirely clear why it's causing it to fail).
If you don't want the facets sorted by decreasing count (the default),
you can specify
facet.sort=index
to get index order ((lexicographic by indexed term)
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.com -- making solr shine
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 2:08 PM, MC videm...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Here is a public
We've created a Solr distribution called HDS (Heliosearch Distribution
for Solr) as the basis for our support + bug-backport subscriptions
(but you can use it without one). Since it's both open source and free
to use, I figured it would be of general interest here, especially for
Tomcat fans.
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Dmitry Kan solrexp...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Erick!
To be sure we are using cost 101 and no cache. It seems to affect on
searches as we expected.
Basically with cache on we see more fat spikes around commit points, as
cache is getting flushed (we don't rerun
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 4:45 AM, Dmitry Kan solrexp...@gmail.com wrote:
ok, we were able to confirm the behavior regarding not caching the filter
query. It works as expected. It does not cache with {!cache=false}.
We are still looking into clarifying the cost assignment: i.e. whether it
works
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Lemke, Michael SZ/HZA-ZSW
lemke...@schaeffler.com wrote:
I am running into performance problems with faceted queries.
If I do a
q=wordfacet.field=CONTENTfacet=truefacet.limit=10facet.mincount=1facet.method=fcfacet.prefix=arows=0
I am getting an exception:
For a reasonable top-N, the space efficiency should still be the same
as it is really just dominated by the FieldCache representation (is it
in-memory or disk-docvalue based). Directly sorting on that numeric
field vs deriving a score from the field and sorting on that shouldn't
really be that
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.com wrote:
Yonik:
Of course I'm not really up on the details of sorting, but aren't there
various control structures that are allocated for a sort but not for
scoring? I'm thinking of long[maxDoc] type structures in addition
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Peter Keegan peterlkee...@gmail.com wrote:
fq=$qq
What is the proper syntax?
fq={!query v=$qq}
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.com -- making solr shine
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Hoggarth, Gil gil.hogga...@bl.uk wrote:
I could stop the whole Solr service as
as yet there's no audience access to it, but might it be left in an
incomplete state and thus try to complete optimisation when the service
is restarted?
Should be fine.
Lucene
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Patrick Duc patrick_...@yahoo.fr wrote:
russia (web OR NOT(russia)
russia (web (*:* -russia))
Negative clauses often need something positive to subtract from... so
replace NOT russia with (*:* -russia)
-Yonik
http://heliosearch.com -- making solr shine
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 12:07 PM, andres and...@octopart.com wrote:
I'm debating whether or not to set the 'facets.missing' parameter to true by
default when faceting. What is the performance impact of setting
'facets.missing' to true?
It really depends on the faceting method. For some
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 2:19 PM, gohome190 gohome...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a database that has about 25 fields for each entry. However, when I
do a solr *:* query, I can only see the first 19 fields for each entry.
However, I can successfully use the fields that don't show up as queries.
So
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:38 AM, eShard zim...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have and ID that consists of two letters and a number.
The whole user title looks like this: Lastname, Firstname (LA12345).
Now, with my current configuration, I can search for LA12345 and find the
user.
However, when I type in
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Otis Gospodnetic
otis.gospodne...@gmail.com wrote:
Seeing so much work being put in routing and seeing the recent
questions about the status of global IDF support made me realize, for
the first time really, that with people using routing more and more we
should
this queryResultCache assumption today.
Cheers,
Tim
On 16/10/13 06:33 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Tim Vaillancourtt...@elementspace.com
wrote:
I am debugging some /select queries on my Solr tier and would like to see
if there is a way to tell Solr to skip
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Tim Vaillancourt t...@elementspace.com wrote:
I am debugging some /select queries on my Solr tier and would like to see
if there is a way to tell Solr to skip the caches on a given /select query
if it happens to ALREADY be in the cache. Live queries are being
Perhaps try adding echoParams=all
to check that all of the input params are being parsed as expected.
-Yonik
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:10 PM, Utkarsh Sengar utkarsh2...@gmail.com wrote:
Didn't help.
This is the complete data: https://gist.github.com/utkarsh2012/6927649 (see
merchantList
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Brett Hoerner br...@bretthoerner.com wrote:
I'm curious what the later shard-local bits do, if anything?
I have a very large cluster (256 shards) and I'm sending most of my data
with a single composite, e.g. 1234!unique_id, but I'm noticing the data
is being
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Brett Hoerner br...@bretthoerner.com wrote:
This is my clusterstate.json:
https://gist.github.com/bretthoerner/0098f741f48f9bb51433
And these are my core sizes (note large ones are sorted to the end):
https://gist.github.com/bretthoerner/f5b5e099212194b5dff6
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Shawn Heisey s...@elyograg.org wrote:
There is also the distrib=false parameter that will cause the request to
be handled directly by the core it is sent to rather than being
distributed/balanced by SolrCloud.
Right - this is probably the best option for
frange (function range) is what you are looking for.
http://yonik.com/posts/ranges-over-functions-in-solr-1-4/
-Yonik
http://lucidworks.com
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 10:21 AM, SandroZbinden zbin...@imagic.ch wrote:
Is there a way to use the function return value for a range query
For example:
If you're using solr, things may work out of the box without using classes.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Function+Queries
-Yonik
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 3:36 AM, Ankit Kumar ankitthemight...@gmail.com wrote:
In Lucene i need to add custom score using function query classes .
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 2:28 AM, Tanu Garg tanugarg2...@gmail.com wrote:
tried this as well. but its not working.
It's working fine for me. What version of Solr are you using?
What does your complete request look like?
-Yonik
http://lucidworks.com
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 6:40 AM, Tanu Garg tanugarg2...@gmail.com wrote:
My field name is kcmeta/bookmark/count
You can always use the field function to handle whacky field
names... unquoted if it's simple enough, or quoted if it's not.
field(kcmeta/bookmark/count)
or
)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool.runJob(QueuedThreadPool.java:608)
at
org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool$3.run(QueuedThreadPool.java:543)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:722)
Sesha
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@lucidworks.com wrote
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Timothy Potter thelabd...@gmail.com wrote:
Trying to add some information about core.properties and auto-discovery in
Solr in Action and am at a loss for what to tell the reader is the purpose
of this feature.
IMO, it was more a removal of unnecessary central
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Sesha Sendhil Subramanian
seshasend...@indix.com wrote:
I am using solr 4.4 in solr cloud configuration. When i try to 'set' a
field in a document using the update request handler, I get a 'missing
required field' error.
Can you show the exact error message
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Phani Chaitanya pvempaty@gmail.com wrote:
I'm wondering what happens to commit while we are indexing in parallel in
Solr. Are the indexing update requests blocked until the commit finishes ?
Nope. The add (updates) and commit can proceed in parallel.
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
shalinman...@gmail.com wrote:
AFAIk, enablePositionIncrements=false is deprecated in 4.x but not
removed. It will be removed in 5.0 though.
Hmmm, I had missed that.
Anyone have pointers to an example of what broken means and why it
can't
I just tried a simple test with the example data, and things seem to
be working fine...
I tried this:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select
?q=*:*
rows=100
fl=id, inStock, if(inStock,10,0)
I saw values of 10 when inStock==true and values of 0 when it was
missing or explicitly false.
Perhaps
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 7:16 AM, Sandro Zbinden zbin...@imagic.ch wrote:
Is there a plan to add support for alphabetical facet sorting with non ASCII
Characters ?
The entire unicode range should already work. Can you give an example
of what you would like to see?
-Yonik
http://lucidworks.com
I can reproduce something like this by specifying a field that doesn't
exist for a qf param.
This seems like a bug... if a field doesn't exist, we should throw an
exception (since it's a parameter error not related to the q string where
we avoid throwing any errors).
-Yonik
http://lucidworks.com
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Shawn Heisey s...@elyograg.org wrote:
You also have grouping enabled. From what I understand, that can be slow.
If you turn that off, what happens to your elapsed times?
QTime would include that. It includes everything up until the point
where the response
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Erick Erickson
erickerick...@gmail.com wrote:
A question recently came up: Does the tlog store the entire document when
an atomic update happens or just the incoming delta? My guess is that it
stores the entire document, but that's a guess...
Correct.
-Yonik
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Anirudha Jadhav aniru...@nyu.edu wrote:
quick question on a similar topic,
for a NRT call to index a doc ,returns a success return code, if and only
if all available server have successfully written the doc to their tlog.
correct?
Right.
-Yonik
*All* of the terms in the field must be matched by the querynot vice-versa.
And no, we don't have a query for that out of the box. To implement,
it seems like it would require the total number of terms indexed for a
field (for each document).
I guess you could also index start and end tokens
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 4:58 AM, Bruno René Santos brunor...@gmail.com wrote:
I thought that by adding a new document with the same id on Solr the
document already on Solr would be updated with the new info.
Yes, this should be the case.
But both
documents appear on the search results... How
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.com wrote:
My guess is you're hitting the first time something is done, like sorting
or some such
occasionally on these queries by chance when a new searcher is opened.
And actually, if it was something like sorting (populating
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Chris Hostetter
hossman_luc...@fucit.org wrote:
there is however a group.cache.percent option tha you might look into --
but i honestly have no idea if that toggles the use of queryResultCache or
something else, i havn't played with it before...
That's only a
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Roman Chyla roman.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
Let me just explain better what I found when I dug inside solr: documents
(results of the query) are loaded before they are passed into a writer - so
the writers are expecting to encounter the solr documents, but these
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Mikhail Khludnev
mkhlud...@griddynamics.com wrote:
anyway, even if writer pulls docs one by one, it doesn't allow to stream a
billion of them. Solr writes out DocList, which is really problematic even
in deep-paging scenarios.
Which part is problematic... the
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Tim Vaillancourt t...@elementspace.com wrote:
ERROR [2013-07-25 19:34:24.264] [org.apache.solr.common.SolrException]
Failure to open existing log file (non fatal)
That itself isn't necessarily a problem (and why it says non fatal)
- it just means that most
function queries to the rescue!
q={!func}def(query($a),query($b),query($c))
a=field1:value1
b=field2:value2
c=field3:value3
def or default function returns the value of the first argument that
matches. It's named default because it's more commonly used like
def(popularity,50) (return the value
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:53 PM, JohnRodey timothydd...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have a TrieDateField dynamic field setup in my schema, pretty standard...
dynamicField name=*_tdt type=tdate indexed=true stored=false/
fieldType name=tdate class=solr.TrieDateField omitNorms=true
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Timothy Potter thelabd...@gmail.com wrote:
This is not a problem per se, just want to verify that we're not able
to specify which server shard splits are created as of 4.3.1? From
what I've seen, the new cores for the sub-shards are created on the
leader of
Be careful with URL encoding... that may be messing you up depending
on how you are trying to submit the query (and the single you were
using as AND)
fq={!join from=root_id to=id}type:arm AND attr1=left
fq={!join from=root_id to=id}type:leg AND attr1=right
-Yonik
http://lucidworks.com
On Wed,
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Rohit Harchandani rhar...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey,
I am trying to create a plugin which makes use of postfilter. I know that
the collect function is called for every document matched, but is there a
way i can access all the matched documents upto this point before
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 8:18 AM, adfel70 adfe...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a field that's only indexed in some of the documents.
Can I create a boolean facet on this field by its existence?
for instance:
yes(124)
no(479)
Note that the fields' value is not facetable because all its values are
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 10:57 AM, adityab aditya_ba...@yahoo.com wrote:
well our observation leads us that this happens only during spell check.
If we turn off the spell check we don't see this issue occurring at all from
our 24hrs test run.
Are you using any custom components / plugins, or is
On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 2:22 PM, mihaela olteanu mihaela...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hello,
I have 3 indices that form a hierarchy. Basically these were constructed from
3 tables: parent, child1 and child2 and between parent and children there is
a one to many relationship.
parent (id,name)
Yes, joins support distributed search fine,
provided that the individual documents that are joined reside on the same shard.
For example, if you are modeling blogs and posts (one blog object as many posts)
shard1
--
joe!blog_info
joe!post1
shard2
--
If you just want to retrieve those counts, this seems like simple faceting.
q=something
facet=true
facet.query=product:hunger
facet.query=product:games
-Yonik
http://lucidworks.com
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Tony Mullins tonymullins...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi ,
I have lots of crawled data,
-frequency in
resultset without any modification to Solr source code ?
Thanks,
Tony
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@lucidworks.com wrote:
If you just want to retrieve those counts, this seems like simple faceting.
q=something
facet=true
facet.query=product:hunger
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:40 PM, slevytam developm...@the10thfloor.com wrote:
Hi Yonik,
Can you offer any insight as to how one might ensure that documents reside
on the same shard as the document you'd like them to join.
For example:
I'd like to do a simple join of user actions to a
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.com wrote:
stored and indexed both default to true.
This is legal:
field name=alpha type=string /
Actually, for fields I believe the defaults come from the fieldType.
The fieldType defaults to true for both indexed and
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 7:55 PM, Upayavira u...@odoko.co.uk wrote:
However, if from your example, innerCollection was replicated across all
nodes, I would think that should work, because all that comes back from
each server when a distributed search happens is the best 'n' matches,
so exactly
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Arun Rangarajan
arunrangara...@gmail.com wrote:
http://docs.lucidworks.com/display/solr/Working+with+External+Files+and+Processes
says
this about external file fields:
They can be used only for function queries or display.
I understand how to use them in
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Joshi, Shital shital.jo...@gs.com wrote:
But now Solr stores composite id in the document id
Correct, it's the document id itself that contains everything needed
for tje compositeId router to determine the hash.
It would only use it to calculate hash key but
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.com wrote:
Except, that Solr's divergence from a true, pure REST API is certainly one
of the elements of its badness.
Most complex systems seem to feel the need to diverge from pure REST
for the sake of being practical.
From
FYI, I've created a #solr-dev IRC channel for those who contribute to
Solr's development.
There used to be more of a community feel on some of the IRC
channels that's since been lost, so I'm trying to get some of that
back with a smaller subset of people interested in developing Solr.
The channel
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Otis Gospodnetic
otis.gospodne...@gmail.com wrote:
Mucho good! +1
Why unlogged though? Just curious.
Personal preference give it a more informal / slightly more private feel.
Some people don't want casual watercooler chat recorded publicized forever.
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.com wrote:
I really question whether this is valuable. Much of Solr performance
is there explicitly because of caches
Right, and it's also the case that certain solr features are coded
with the cache in mind (i.e. they will be
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Chris Hostetter
hossman_luc...@fucit.org wrote:
and think that conceptually it
doesn't make sense for facet.missing to consider facet.mincount.
+1
facet.missing asks for the missing count - regardless of what it is.
Although it might make sense in some use cases
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Jason Hellman
jhell...@innoventsolutions.com wrote:
Those are default, though autoSoftCommit is commented out by default.
Keep in mind about the hard commit running every 15 seconds: it is not
updating your searchable data (due to the openSearcher=false
401 - 500 of 2724 matches
Mail list logo
