: Imagine there is a query like harry potter dvd-collection cheap or cheap
: Harry Potter dvd-collection.
: How can I customize, that, if there is something said about the category
: cheap, Solr uses a facetting query on cat:cheap? To do so, I have to
: alter the original query - how can I do
Hello Hossman,
sorry for my late response.
For this specific case, you are right. It makes more sense to do such work
on the fly.
However, I am only testing at the moment, what one can do with Solr and what
not.
Is the UpdateProcessor something that comes froms Lucene itself or from
Solr?
On Jan 11, 2010, at 7:33 AM, MitchK wrote:
Is the UpdateProcessor something that comes froms Lucene itself or
from
Solr?
It's at the Solr level - http://lucene.apache.org/solr/api/org/apache/solr/update/processor/UpdateRequestProcessor.html
Erik
Is there any schemata that explains which class is responsible for which
level of processing my data to the index?
My example was: I have categorized, whether something is cheap or expensive.
Let's say I didn't do that on the fly, but with the help of the
UpdateRequestProcessor.
Imagine there
Okay, you're right. It really would be cleaner, if I do such stuff in the
code which populates the document to Solr.
Is there a way to prepare a document the described way with Lucene/Solr,
before I analyze it?
My use case is to categorize several documents in an automatic way, which
includes
Somewhere, you have to create the document XML you
send to SOLR. Just add the calculated data to
your new field there...
HTH
Erick
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 9:30 AM, MitchK mitc...@web.de wrote:
Okay, you're right. It really would be cleaner, if I do such stuff in the
code which populates the
: Is there a way to prepare a document the described way with Lucene/Solr,
: before I analyze it?
: My use case is to categorize several documents in an automatic way, which
: includes that I have to create data from the given input doing some
: information retrieval.
As Ryan mentioned earlier:
Eric,
you mean, everything is okay, but I do not see it?
Internally for searching the analysis takes place and writes to the
index in an inverted fashion, but the stored stuff is left alone.
if I use an analyzer, Solr stores it's output two ways?
One public output, which is similar to the
On Jan 7, 2010, at 10:50 AM, MitchK wrote:
Eric,
you mean, everything is okay, but I do not see it?
Internally for searching the analysis takes place and writes to the
index in an inverted fashion, but the stored stuff is left alone.
if I use an analyzer, Solr stores it's output two
Thank you, Ryan. I will have a look on lucene's material and luke.
I think I got it. :)
Sometimes there will be the need, to response on the one hand the value and
on the other hand the indexed version of the value.
How can I fullfill such needs? Doing copyfield on indexed-only fields?
On Jan 7, 2010, at 12:11 PM, MitchK wrote:
Thank you, Ryan. I will have a look on lucene's material and luke.
I think I got it. :)
Sometimes there will be the need, to response on the one hand the
value and
on the other hand the indexed version of the value.
How can I fullfill such
What is your use case for responding sometimes with the indexed value?
Other than reconstructing a field that hasn't been stored, I can't think of
one.
I still think you're missing the point. Indexing and storing are
orthogonal operations that have (almost) nothing to do with each
other, for all
The difference between stored and indexed is clear now.
You are right, if you are responsing only to normal users.
Use case:
You got a stored field The good, the bad and the ugly.
And you got a really fantastic analyzer, which is doing some magic to this
movie title.
Let's say, the analyzer
Well, I'd approach either of these use cases
by simply performing my computations on
the input and storing the result in another
(non-indexed unless I wanted to search it)
field. This wouldn't happen in the Analyzer,
but in the code that populated the document
fields.
Which is a much cleaner
Well, I have noticed that Solr isn't using ANY analyzer
How do you know this? Because it's highly unlikely that SOLR
is completely broken on that level.
Erick
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 3:48 PM, MitchK mitc...@web.de wrote:
I have tested a lot and all the time I thought I set wrong options
On Jan 6, 2010, at 3:48 PM, MitchK wrote:
I have tested a lot and all the time I thought I set wrong options
for my
custom analyzer.
Well, I have noticed that Solr isn't using ANY analyzer, filter or
stemmer.
It seems like it only stores the original input.
The stored value is always
Hello Erick,
thank you for answering.
I can do whatever I want - Solr does nothing.
For example: If I use the textgen-fieldtype which is predefined, nothing
happens to the text. Even the stopFilter is not working - no stopword from
stopword.txt was replaced. I think, that this only affects the
Hello Ryan,
thank you for answering.
In my schema.xml I am defining the field as indexed = true.
The problem is: nothing, even the original predefined analyzers don't work
anyway.
Please, have a look on my response to Erick.
Mitch
P.S.
Oh, I see what you mean. The field is indexed = true. My
Mitch,
Again, I think you're misunderstanding what analysis does. You must
be expecting we think, though you've not provided exact duplication
steps to be sure, that the value you get back from Solr is the
analyzer processed output. It's not, it's exactly what you provide.
Internally
19 matches
Mail list logo
