I have a query on course:
1. if course will begin, then sort those by beginTime asc.
2. if couse ended, then sort those by begin desc.
how to query use solr?
thanks.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-to-query-this-tp4165998.html
Sent from the Solr -
Thx Mike,
at the moment I do not see/understand what the advantage of feed a single
suggester from multiple fields compared to using copyfields to feed the
suggester field is?
Also, coming back to my main issue, how does your approach allow me to filter
the documents to be taken into
check if() and map()
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Function+Queries
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 9:05 AM, rulinma ruli...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a query on course:
1. if course will begin, then sort those by beginTime asc.
2. if couse ended, then sort those by begin desc.
how
I will explain with an example.
Let's say field_a is sent in the update with the value of 5. field_a is already
stored in the document with the value 8.
After the update field_a should have the value 13 (sum).
The value of field_b will be based on the value of 13 and not 5.
Is there a way in URP
not solve my question.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-to-query-this-tp4165998p4166007.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
You can get the summed value, 13, if you add a processor after
DistributedUpdateProcessorFactory in the URP chain. Then one possibility
would be to clone this value to another field, such as field_b, and run
other processors on that field.
Or for something more customized, you can use
the
Hi all,
As a bit of background, we're trying to run a map-reduce job on a Hadoop
cluster (CDH version 4.5.0) which involved reading/writing from Solr during
both the Map and Reduce phase. To accomplish this, we are using the Solrj
library with version 4.4.0-search-1.3.0. In a separate
On 10/27/14 2:23 AM, Clemens Wyss DEV wrote:
Thx Mike,
at the moment I do not see/understand what the advantage of feed a single suggester from
multiple fields compared to using copyfields to feed the suggester field is?
The advantage is mainly in that you can apply different analysis and
I have this line highlighted
emJobs/em was emborn/em in San Francisco, California on February
24 1955.
for query Jobs born~15 but not for born Jobs~15. I want the same result
irrespective of the order of search keywords.
Regards,
John Eipe
“The Roots of Violence: Wealth without work, Pleasure
Hi
We are trying to upgrade our index from 3.6.1 to 4.9.1 and I wanted to make
sure our existing indexing strategy is still valid or not. The statistics
of the raw corpus are:
- 4.8 Billon total number of tokens in the entire corpus.
- 13MM documents
We have 3 requirements
1) we want to
OK, clarify a bit more what you're doing with Hadoop. Are you using
the MapReduceIndexerTool? Or are your Hadoop jobs writing directly to
SolrCloud?
How are you measuring out of sync? Are you sure that you've
committed? Does out of synch mean reporting different result counts?
Different order?
Well, maybe you can work with the ComplexPhraseQueryParser, that's
been around for a while, see:
http://lucene.apache.org/core/4_10_1/queryparser/org/apache/lucene/queryparser/complexPhrase/ComplexPhraseQueryParser.html
Or you can just live with the inherent slop in the ~ operator. You
haven't
Is there a way in Solr to filter out stopwords in shingles like ES does?
http://www.elasticsearch.org/blog/searching-with-shingles/
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Stopwords-in-shingles-suggester-tp4166057.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive
On 10/27/2014 6:20 AM, Robust Links wrote:
1) we want to index and search all tokens in a document (i.e. we do not
rely on external stores)
2) we need search time to be fast and willing to pay larger indexing time
and index size,
3) be able to search as fast as possible ngrams of 3
You do not want stopwords in your shingles? Then put the stopword filter on top
of the shingle filter.
Markus
-Original message-
From:O. Klein kl...@octoweb.nl
Sent: Monday 27th October 2014 13:56
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Stopwords in shingles suggester
Is there a
Configure a fieldType in schema.xml as below:
fieldType name=text_shingle class=solr.TextField
positionIncrementGap=0
analyzer
tokenizer class=solr.StandardTokenizerFactory/
..
..
*filter class=solr.StopFilterFactory ignoreCase=true
words=stopwords.txt /*
John,
I’m not seeing this problem. Presumably we’re talking about the default
highlighter (the most accurate one) but I figure the others would match it
too. To test, I added the following to HighlightTest.java in Solr and this
test passed:
@Test
public void testSpan() {
final String
On 10/27/2014 6:56 AM, O. Klein wrote:
Is there a way in Solr to filter out stopwords in shingles like ES does?
http://www.elasticsearch.org/blog/searching-with-shingles/
If I read that correctly, ES isn't doing anything differently than Solr
does. They use the same filters that Solr does.
Yes. It seems to work for Default Highlighting. I'm using Fast Vector
Highlighter.
Let me also explain why I went for Fast Vector Highlighter. I wanted the
highlighted content to be complete and not broken words and for that I
need to use breakIterator which works only for Fast vector
Hi,
You may simply be overwhelming your cluster-nodes. Have you checked
various metrics to see if that is the case?
Otis
--
Monitoring * Alerting * Anomaly Detection * Centralized Log Management
Solr Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/
On Oct 26, 2014, at 9:59 PM, S.L
Ah. Currently the most accurate highlighter is the default one, so if
accuracy is more important than BreakIterator then you’ll have to switch
back. Keep an eye out for some efficiency enhancements to this highlighter
“real soon now”. Separately from that efficiency, later this year I may
have
Hi
My solr searches with highlighting returns documents (with all fields) that
contain the search words and highlighting.
Is there a way to restrict so that I get only id field + highlighting.
result name=response numFound=1 start=0
doc
str name=id1253/str
/doc
/result
lst name=highlighting
Thanks David.
So I guess I will have to go with default highlighter (with a higher
fragsize) and then take care of boundryScanning myself.
Is this
https://wiki.apache.org/solr/AnalyzersTokenizersTokenFilters#solr.StopFilterFactory
what you are looking for? Basically, you can use analyzers for this
purpose. You can even write your own analyzer.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 6:26 PM, O. Klein kl...@octoweb.nl wrote:
Is there a way in Solr
This doesn't answer your question, but unless something is changed,
you're going to want to set this to false. It causes index corruption at
the moment.
On 10/25/14 03:42, Norgorn wrote:
bool name=solr.hdfs.blockcache.write.enabledtrue/bool
Hi all,
We noticed that there isn't a Lucene/Solr user group in London (although
there is an Elasticsearch user group) - so we decided to start one!
http://www.meetup.com/Apache-Lucene-Solr-London-User-Group
Please join if you're interested and do pass the word. Our first meeting
will be
Have you looked at 'fl' parameter? You can experiment with that in the Admin UI.
Regards,
Alex.
Personal: http://www.outerthoughts.com/ and @arafalov
Solr resources and newsletter: http://www.solr-start.com/ and @solrstart
Solr popularizers community: https://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=6713853
Already tried with same result (the message changed properly )
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-HDFS-settings-tp4165873p4166089.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Awesome.
And whatever lessons you learn, please share them on the popularizers
LinkedIn group. That's what it's there for. Also, feel free to
announce it there and ask for feedback.
Regards,
Alex.
Personal: http://www.outerthoughts.com/ and @arafalov
Solr resources and newsletter:
While starting now with SolrCloud I tried to understand the sense
of external zookeeper.
Let's assume I want to split 1 huge collection accross 4 server.
My straight forward idea is to setup a cloud with 4 shards (one
on each server) and also have a replication of the shard on another
server.
You want external zookeepers. Partially because you don't want your Solr
garbage collections holding up zookeeper availability, but also because
you don't want your zookeepers going offline if you have to restart Solr
for some reason.
Also, you want 3 or 5 zookeeepers, not 4 or 8.
On
Thank Otis,
I have checked the logs , in my case the default catalina.out and I dont
see any OOMs or , any other exceptions.
What others metrics do you suggest ?
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Otis Gospodnetic
otis.gospodne...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
You may simply be overwhelming your
It is an ancient issue. One of the major contributors to the issue was resolved
some versions ago but we are still seeing it sometimes too, there is nothing to
see in the logs. We ignore it and just reindex.
-Original message-
From:S.L simpleliving...@gmail.com
Sent: Monday 27th
I'm curious, could you elaborate on the issue and the partial fix?
Thanks!
On 10/27/14 11:31, Markus Jelsma wrote:
It is an ancient issue. One of the major contributors to the issue was resolved
some versions ago but we are still seeing it sometimes too, there is nothing to
see in the logs.
Markus,
I would like to ignore it too, but whats happening is that the there is a
lot of discrepancy between the replicas , queries like
q=*:*fq=(id:220a8dce-3b31-4d46-8386-da8405595c47) fail depending on which
replica the request goes to, because of huge amount of discrepancy between
the
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4260 resolved
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4924 open
-Original message-
From:Michael Della Bitta michael.della.bi...@appinions.com
Sent: Monday 27th October 2014 16:40
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Heavy
Perfect. Thanks.
Regards,
John Eipe
“The Roots of Violence: Wealth without work, Pleasure without conscience,
Knowledge without character, Commerce without morality, Science without
humanity, Worship without sacrifice, Politics without principles”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Hi - if there is a very large discrepancy, you could consider to purge the
smallest replica, it will then resync from the leader.
-Original message-
From:S.L simpleliving...@gmail.com
Sent: Monday 27th October 2014 16:41
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Heavy
Thank you very much for your suggestion.
I created an update processor factory with my logic.
I changed the update processor chain to be:
processor class=solr.LogUpdateProcessorFactory /
processor class=solr.RunUpdateProcessorFactory /
processor
One is not smaller than the other, because the numDocs is same for both
replicas and essentially they seem to be disjoint sets.
Also manually purging the replicas is not option , because this is
frequently indexed index and we need everything to be automated.
What other options do I have now.
Hi Elran,
You need to explicitly specify the DistributedUpdateProcessorFactory in the
chain and then add your custom processor after it.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Elran Dvir elr...@checkpoint.com wrote:
Thank you very much for your suggestion.
I created an update processor factory
http://heliosearch.org/download
Heliosearch v0.08 Features:
o Heliosearch v0.08 is based on (and contains all features of)
Lucene/Solr 4.10.2
o Streaming Aggregations over search results API:
http://heliosearch.org/streaming-aggregation-for-solrcloud/
o Optimized request logging, and
No problem Elran. As Shalin mentioned, you will need to do it like this:
processor class=solr.DistributedUpdateProcessorFactory/
processor class=mycode.solr_plugins.FieldManipulationProcessorFactory /
processor class=solr.LogUpdateProcessorFactory /
processor class=solr.RunUpdateProcessorFactory
Please find the clusterstate.json attached.
Also in this case *atleast *the Shard1 replicas are out of sync , as can be
seen below.
*Shard 1 replica 1 *does not* return a result with distrib=false.*
*Query :*
Thank you all for your input.
The stopword is being replaced by the fillerToken as shown in the article.
Changing positionIncrementGap makes no difference and as of Solr 4.4, the
enablePositionIncrements argument is no longer supported in the
StopFilterFactory.
So how do I get this working in
Hi,
I think you can set fillerToken value?
Ahmet
On Monday, October 27, 2014 8:03 PM, O. Klein kl...@octoweb.nl wrote:
Thank you all for your input.
The stopword is being replaced by the fillerToken as shown in the article.
Changing positionIncrementGap makes no difference and as of Solr
I changed luceneMatchVersion to 4.3 and got the behavior i was looking for.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Stopwords-in-shingles-suggester-tp4166057p4166192.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
2 naïve comments, of course.
- Queuing theory
- Zookeeper logs.
From: S.L [mailto:simpleliving...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 1:42 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Heavy Multi-threaded indexing and SolrCloud 4.10.1 replicas out of
synch.
Good point about ZK logs , I do see the following exceptions intermittently
in the ZK log.
2014-10-27 06:54:14,621 [myid:1] - INFO [NIOServerCxn.Factory:
0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:2181:NIOServerCnxn@1007] - Closed socket connection for
client /xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:56877 which had sessionid 0x34949dbad580029
Erick Erickson has a comment on a thread out there that says there's a lot of
pinging between SolrCloud and ZK. AND if a timeout occurs (which could be
fallback behavior on that exception) ZK will mark the node down AND SolrCloud
won't use it until ZK gets back inline/online.
Fwiw.
50 matches
Mail list logo
