I searched and read about auto-complete feature. Thanks. It looks
nice, I think I should try it first.
NM On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:15:21 +0300
NM Aleksey Gogolev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
I'm new to solr and I need to make a search suggest (like google
suggestions).
NM Hi Aleksey,
Hi,
I have encountered a weird problem in solr.
In one of my queries (dismax, default sorting) I noticed that the results
are not sorted by score (according to debugQuery).
The first 150 results are tied (with score 12.806474), and after those,
there is a bunch of results with higher score
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Yuri Jan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have encountered a weird problem in solr.
In one of my queries (dismax, default sorting) I noticed that the results
are not sorted by score (according to debugQuery).
The first 150 results are tied (with score 12.806474),
Actually, no...
The score in the fl are 12.806475 and 10.386531 respectively, so the results
according to that are sorted correctly.
Is it just a problem with the debugQuery?
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Yuri Jan [EMAIL
Hmm, sounds like a bug. A test case would be great, but at a minimum
file a JIRA.
Do those other terms that collate properly have multiple suggestions?
On Aug 25, 2008, at 6:24 PM, Matthew Runo wrote:
Hello folks!
I seem to be seeing a bug in the SpellCheckComponent..
Search term:
runnning does have multiple suggestions, Cunning and Running - but it
properly picks Running. I have not noticed this for any other term,
but I have not exhaustively tested others yet.
Thanks for your time!
Matthew Runo
Software Engineer, Zappos.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 702-943-7833
On Aug
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Yuri Jan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, no...
The score in the fl are 12.806475 and 10.386531 respectively, so the results
according to that are sorted correctly.
Is it just a problem with the debugQuery?
Looks like it... I guess the custom similarity
Thanks Otis! :)
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:47 PM, Otis Gospodnetic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jake,
Yes, that field would have to be some kind of an analyzed field (e.g. text),
not string if you wanted that query to match Jake is Testing input. There
are no built-in Lucene or Solr-specific
Hello,
I have been performing some simple distributed search tests and don't
understand why distributed search seems to work in some circumstances but
not others.
In my setup I have compiled the example server using the solr trunk
downloaded on Aug 22nd. I am running a sample server instance
Aha! Yep, that's the problem (not set to store in schema.xml)! Thanks!
It fails because you are using localhost as part of a shard name.
When you send the request to fred it uses the fred shard and the
localhost shard (which is the same as fred!)
-Yonik
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Ronald Aubin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I have been performing some
Yonik,
Thanks for your reply. I'm not sure if I understand completely. Do you
mean that each solr server should be given a different shard list and not a
list containing all shards?
So in my case:
1) host fred should be given a shard list containing only locahost,
2) localhost should be
Hi all,
I've had a multicore system running for while now, and I just cycled the
jetty server and all of a sudden I got this error:
SEVERE: java.lang.RuntimeException: java.io.FileNotFoundException: no
segments* file found in
It seems like the debug information is using the custom similarity as it
should - the bug isn't there.
I see in the explain information the right tf value (I modified it to be 1
in my custom similarity).
The numbers in the explain seem to add up and make sense.
Is it possible that the score itself
Yonik,
I now perfectly understand. Thanks for your help. All my tests now
work.
Ron
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It fails because you are using localhost as part of a shard name.
When you send the request to fred it uses the fred shard and the
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Ronald Aubin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for your reply. I'm not sure if I understand completely. Do you
mean that each solr server should be given a different shard list and not a
list containing all shards?
You could use the same shard list (as long
At sesam.no we want to replace a FAST (fast.no) Query Matching Server
with a Solr index.
The index we are trying to replace is not a regular index, but specially
configured to perform phrases (and sub-phrases) matches against several
large lists (like an index with only a 'title' field).
I'm not
Hello - I stumbled across an odd error which my intuition is telling me is a
bug.
Here is my installation:
Solr Specification Version: 1.2.2008.08.13.13.05.16
Lucene Implementation Version: 2.4-dev 685576 - 2008-08-13 10:55:25
I did the following query today:
author:(r*a* AND fisher)
And get
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Andrew Nagy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello - I stumbled across an odd error which my intuition is telling me is a
bug.
Unfortunately, wildcard queries can expand to an undefined number of terms.
This was the reason ConstantScorePrefixQuery and
The screenshot didn't make it (some attachments gets stripped)
Otis
--
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
- Original Message
From: Glenn-Erik Sandbakken [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 1:44:53 PM
Hello,
I'm pretty new to Solr, and not a Java expert, and trying to create my own
plug in according to the instructions given in
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPlugins. I want to integrate an external
stemmer for the Dutch language by creating a new FilterFactory that will
invoke the external
On 27. aug.. 2008, at 19.44, Glenn-Erik Sandbakken wrote:
At sesam.no we want to replace a FAST (fast.no) Query Matching Server
with a Solr index.
The index we are trying to replace is not a regular index, but
specially
configured to perform phrases (and sub-phrases) matches against
Hello.
I'm trying to implement autocomplete feature using the snippet posted
by Dan.
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/200807.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED])
Here is the snippet:
fieldType name=autocomplete class=solr.TextField
analyzer type=index
Hello,
I was wondering if there was an added advantage in using copyField /
to copy a string field to a text field?
If the field is copied to a text field then why not just make the
field a text field and eliminate copying its data?
If you are going to use full text searching on that field
Instead of solr.TestStemFilterFactory, put the fully qualified
classname for the TestStemFilterFactory, i.e.
com.my.great.stemmer.TestStemFilterFactory. The solr.FactoryName
notation is just shorthand for org.apache.solr.BlahBlahBlah
-Grant
On Aug 27, 2008, at 3:27 PM, Jaco wrote:
: It seems like the debug information is using the custom similarity as it
: should - the bug isn't there.
: I see in the explain information the right tf value (I modified it to be 1
: in my custom similarity).
: The numbers in the explain seem to add up and make sense.
: Is it possible that the
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 7:47 PM, Jake Conk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for the reply. Does that mean that if I were to edit the data
then the field it was copied to will not be updated?
You can't really edit a document in Lucene or Solr, really just
overwrite an old document with an
On 8/27/08 5:54 PM, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's really only one use case though... the other being to have a
single stored field that is analyzed multiple different ways.
We are the other use case. We take a title and put it in three
fields: one merely lowercased, one stemmed
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 5:11 AM, Chris Hostetter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
code freeze may be overstating it ... the point of the freeze is to hold
off on new fatures and other misc refactorings and focus on bug fixes and
documentation improvements.
Ah ok. I was under the impression that only
29 matches
Mail list logo
