Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-19 Thread Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ्
, 2008 11:21 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Some new SOLR features On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Jason Rutherglen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the configuration code is going to be rewritten then I would like to see the ability to dynamically update the configuration

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-19 Thread Jason Rutherglen
: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 11:21 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Some new SOLR features On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Jason Rutherglen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the configuration code is going to be rewritten then I would like to see the ability to dynamically update

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-18 Thread Jason Rutherglen
Hi Yonik, One approach I have been working on that I will integrate into SOLR is the ability to use serialized objects for the analyzers so that the schema can be defined on the client side if need be. The analyzer classes will be dynamically loaded. Or there is no need for a schema and plain

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-18 Thread Jason Rutherglen
it. This model works very well for servlet containers. Lance -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yonik Seeley Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 11:21 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Some new SOLR features On Wed, Sep 17, 2008

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-18 Thread Jason Rutherglen
That would allow a single request to see a stable view of the schema, while preventing having to make every aspect of the schema thread-safe. Yes that is the best approach. Nothing will stop one from using java serialization for config persistence, Persistence should not be serialized.

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-18 Thread Jason Rutherglen
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yonik Seeley Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 11:21 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Some new SOLR features On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Jason Rutherglen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-18 Thread Mark Miller
:21 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Some new SOLR features On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Jason Rutherglen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the configuration code is going to be rewritten then I would like to see the ability to dynamically update the configuration and schema

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-18 Thread Jason Rutherglen
Of Yonik Seeley Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 11:21 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Some new SOLR features On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Jason Rutherglen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the configuration code is going to be rewritten then I would like to see

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-17 Thread Yonik Seeley
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:12 AM, Jason Rutherglen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SQL database such as H2 Mainly to offer joins and be able to perform hierarchical queries. Can you define or give an example of what you mean by hierarchical queries? A downside of any type of cross-document queries

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-17 Thread Jason Rutherglen
If the configuration code is going to be rewritten then I would like to see the ability to dynamically update the configuration and schema without needing to reboot the server. Also I would like the configuration classes to just contain data and not have so many methods that operate on the

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-17 Thread Jason Rutherglen
Can you define or give an example of what you mean by hierarchical queries? Good question, I think Erik Hatcher had more ideas on that. I was imagining joins or sub queries like SQL does. Clearly they won't be efficient, but it's easier than implementing joins (or is it) in SOLR? Joins limit

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-17 Thread Yonik Seeley
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Jason Rutherglen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the configuration code is going to be rewritten then I would like to see the ability to dynamically update the configuration and schema without needing to reboot the server. Exactly. Actually, multi-core allows you

RE: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-17 Thread Lance Norskog
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yonik Seeley Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 11:21 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Some new SOLR features On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Jason Rutherglen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the configuration code is going to be rewritten then I would

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-17 Thread Yonik Seeley
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Henrib [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yonik Seeley wrote: ...multi-core allows you to instantiate a completely new core and swap it for the old one, but it's a bit of a heavyweight approach ...a schema object would not be mutable, but that one could easily

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-16 Thread Jason Rutherglen
Hello Ryan, SQL database such as H2 Mainly to offer joins and be able to perform hierarchical queries. Also any other types of queries a hybrid SQL search system would offer. This is something that is best built into SOLR rather than Lucene. It seems like a lot of the users of SOLR work with

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-16 Thread Ryan McKinley
On Sep 16, 2008, at 10:12 AM, Jason Rutherglen wrote: Hello Ryan, SQL database such as H2 Mainly to offer joins and be able to perform hierarchical queries. Also any other types of queries a hybrid SQL search system would offer. This is something that is best built into SOLR rather than

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-16 Thread Henrib
ryantxu wrote: ... Yes, I would like to see a way to specify all the fieldtypes / handlers in one location and then only specify what fields are available for each core. So yes -- I agree. In 2.0, I hope to flush out configs so they are not monstrous. ... What about

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-16 Thread Ryan McKinley
ryantxu wrote: ... Yes, I would like to see a way to specify all the fieldtypes / handlers in one location and then only specify what fields are available for each core. So yes -- I agree. In 2.0, I hope to flush out configs so they are not monstrous. ... What about using include so each

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-16 Thread Henrib
ryantxu wrote: Yes, include would get us some of the way there, but not far enough (IMHO). The problem is that (as written) you still need to have all the configs spattered about various directories. I does not allow us to go *all* the way but it does allow to put

Re: Some new SOLR features

2008-09-15 Thread Ryan McKinley
Here are my gut reactions to this list... in general, most of this comes down to sounds great, if someone did the work I'm all for it! Also, no need to post to solr-user AND solr-dev, probably better to think of solr-user as a superset of solr-dev. 1. Machine learning based suggest