how to exactly query in the multitype
I am using the text field type in the schema.xml provides basic text search for English text. But, it has a surprise: the actual text given to this field is not indexed as-is, and therefore searching for the raw text may not work. If you search To Be Or Not To Be or s.h.e. in a text field, none of these words will found this document. If I query K B ( an artist name) or, the result that only appears K is not what I suppose to. It's better to sometimes retrieval that can omit the stop word and sometimes keep the stop word. So that will not only index the text after removing stop word, but also index the raw text. How to support that requirement?
Need help with DictionaryCompoundWordTokenFilterFactory
Hi, Now I ran into another problem by using the solr.DictionaryCompoundWordTokenFilterFactory :-( If I search for the german word Spargelcremesuppe which contains Spargel, Creme and Suppe SOLR will find way to many result. Its because SOLR finds EVERY entry with either one of the three words in it :-( Here is my schema.xml fieldType name=text_text class=solr.TextField positionIncrementGap=100 analyzer tokenizer class=solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory/ filter class=solr.DictionaryCompoundWordTokenFilterFactory dictionary=dictionary.txt minWordSize=5 minSubwordSize=2 maxSubwordSize=15 onlyLongestMatch=true / filter class=solr.SynonymFilterFactory synonyms=synonyms.txt ignoreCase=true expand=true/ filter class=solr.StopFilterFactory ignoreCase=true words=stopwords.txt/ filter class=solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory/ filter class=solr.RemoveDuplicatesTokenFilterFactory/ filter class=solr.SnowballPorterFilterFactory language=German / /analyzer /fieldType Any help ? Greets, Ralf Kraus
Fwd: Separate error logs
OK, so java.util.logging has no way of sending error messages to a separate log without writing your own Handler/Filter code. If we just skip over the absurdity of that, and the rage it makes me feel, what are my options here? What I'm looking for is for all records to go to one file, and records of a ERROR level and above to go to a separate log. Can I write my own Handlers/Filters, drop them on Jetty's classpath and refer to them in my logging.properties? I.e. without rebuilding the whole WAR, with my files added? Is Solr 1.4 (and its nice SLF4J logging) in a state ready for intensive production usage? Thanks! James -- Forwarded message -- From: James Brady james.colin.br...@gmail.com Date: 2009/1/30 Subject: Re: Separate error logs To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Oh... I should really have found that myself :/ Thank you! 2009/1/30 Ryan McKinley ryan...@gmail.com check: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrLogging You configure whatever flavor logger to write error to a separate log On Jan 30, 2009, at 4:36 PM, James Brady wrote: Hi all,What's the best way for me to split Solr/Lucene error message off to a separate log? Thanks James
Re: [ANN] Lucid Imagination
Hi, I don't find any documentation about Solr Gaze. How can I use it ? Thanks, Regards -- Renaud Delbru Grant Ingersoll wrote: Hi Lucene and Solr users, As some of you may know, Yonik, Erik, Sami, Mark and I teamed up with Marc Krellenstein to create a company to provide commercial support (with SLAs), training, value-add components and services to users of Lucene and Solr. We have been relatively quiet up until now as we prepare our offerings, but I am now pleased to announce the official launch of Lucid Imagination. You can find us at http://www.lucidimagination.com/ and learn more about us at http://www.lucidimagination.com/About/. We have also launched a beta search site dedicated to searching all things in the Lucene ecosystem: Lucene, Solr, Tika, Mahout, Nutch, Droids, etc. It's powered, of course, by Lucene via Solr (we'll provide details in a separate message later about our setup.) You can search the Lucene family of websites, wikis, mail archives and JIRA issues all in one place. To try it out, browse to http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/. Any and all feedback is welcome at f...@lucidimagination.com. Thanks, Grant -- Grant Ingersoll http://www.lucidimagination.com/
Re: Fwd: Separate error logs
Hey James, Your log use case remains me to mine... I wanted to use different log files fore different cores... for the moment there's no way to separate logs in different files (as far as I know). I sorted it using log4j. What I do is send the log data to the linux syslog (using syslog appender). Once the data is there I just coded some scripts to send it wherever I want. You could send your data to syslog and parse that file... and depending on if you find the message TRACE, ERROR, DEBUG... just send that lines to the files you choose. This worked for me (not 100% coz there are log messages without the name of the core) to separate logs depending on the core name without doing any hack. In your case would work even better coz you always have the log level in the message. If someone knows any better way to do that please let me know... James Brady-3 wrote: OK, so java.util.logging has no way of sending error messages to a separate log without writing your own Handler/Filter code. If we just skip over the absurdity of that, and the rage it makes me feel, what are my options here? What I'm looking for is for all records to go to one file, and records of a ERROR level and above to go to a separate log. Can I write my own Handlers/Filters, drop them on Jetty's classpath and refer to them in my logging.properties? I.e. without rebuilding the whole WAR, with my files added? Is Solr 1.4 (and its nice SLF4J logging) in a state ready for intensive production usage? Thanks! James -- Forwarded message -- From: James Brady james.colin.br...@gmail.com Date: 2009/1/30 Subject: Re: Separate error logs To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Oh... I should really have found that myself :/ Thank you! 2009/1/30 Ryan McKinley ryan...@gmail.com check: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrLogging You configure whatever flavor logger to write error to a separate log On Jan 30, 2009, at 4:36 PM, James Brady wrote: Hi all,What's the best way for me to split Solr/Lucene error message off to a separate log? Thanks James -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Separate-error-logs-tp21756080p21876778.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Realtime Searching..
I need to find a solution for our current social application. It's low traffic now because we are early on.. However I'm expecting and want to be prepaired to grow. We have messages of different types that are aggregated into one stream. Each of these message types have much different data so that our main queries have a few unions and many joins. I know that Solr would work great for searching but we need a realtime system (twitter-like) to view user updates. I'm not interested in a few minutes delay; I need something that will be fast updating and searchable and have n columns per record/document. Can solor do this? what is Ocean? Thanks
Issuing just a spell check query
The docs for the SpellCheckComponent say The SpellCheckComponent is designed to provide inline spell checking of queries without having to issue separate requests. I would like to issue just a spell check query, I dont care about it being inline and piggy-backing off a normal search query. How would I achieve this? I tried monkeying with making a new requestHandler but using class = solr.SearchHandler always tries to do a normal search. I succeeded in adding inline spell checking to the default request handler by *adding* arr name=last-components strspellcheck/str /arr to its requestHandler config - I would like to *remove* the default search component - maybe by making a new request handler which just does spell checking? Is something like this possible? requestHandler name=/spellcheck class=solr.SearchHandler !-- default values for query parameters -- lst name=defaults str name=spellcheck.count5/str /lst arr name=first-components strspellcheck/str /arr !-- remove default search component -- arr name=remove-components strdefault/str /arr /requestHandler Now, I can sort of achieve what I want by in fact a normal search but then using a dummy value for my q parameter (for me 00 works) and then I get no search docs back, but I do get the spell suggestions I want, driven by the spellcheck.q parameter. But this seems very hacky and Solr is still having to run a search against my dummy value. A roundabout way of asking: how can I fire off *just* a spell check query? Thanks in advance -Rupert
Re: Realtime Searching..
Michael, The short answer is that Solr is not there yet, but will be. Expect to see real-time search in Lucene first, then in Solr. We have a case study about real-time search with Lucene in the upcoming Lucene in Action 2, but a more tightly integrated real-time search will be added to Lucene down the road (and then Solr). In the mean time you can use the trick of one large and less frequently updated core and one small and more frequently updated core + distributed search across them. Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch From: Michael Austin mausti...@gmail.com To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 1:02:43 PM Subject: Realtime Searching.. I need to find a solution for our current social application. It's low traffic now because we are early on.. However I'm expecting and want to be prepaired to grow. We have messages of different types that are aggregated into one stream. Each of these message types have much different data so that our main queries have a few unions and many joins. I know that Solr would work great for searching but we need a realtime system (twitter-like) to view user updates. I'm not interested in a few minutes delay; I need something that will be fast updating and searchable and have n columns per record/document. Can solor do this? what is Ocean? Thanks
Re: Issuing just a spell check query
Rupert, You could use the SpellCheck*Handler* to achieve this. Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch From: Rupert Fiasco rufia...@gmail.com To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 2:47:19 PM Subject: Issuing just a spell check query The docs for the SpellCheckComponent say The SpellCheckComponent is designed to provide inline spell checking of queries without having to issue separate requests. I would like to issue just a spell check query, I dont care about it being inline and piggy-backing off a normal search query. How would I achieve this? I tried monkeying with making a new requestHandler but using class = solr.SearchHandler always tries to do a normal search. I succeeded in adding inline spell checking to the default request handler by *adding* arr name=last-components strspellcheck/str /arr to its requestHandler config - I would like to *remove* the default search component - maybe by making a new request handler which just does spell checking? Is something like this possible? requestHandler name=/spellcheck class=solr.SearchHandler !-- default values for query parameters -- lst name=defaults str name=spellcheck.count5/str /lst arr name=first-components strspellcheck/str /arr !-- remove default search component -- arr name=remove-components strdefault/str /arr /requestHandler Now, I can sort of achieve what I want by in fact a normal search but then using a dummy value for my q parameter (for me 00 works) and then I get no search docs back, but I do get the spell suggestions I want, driven by the spellcheck.q parameter. But this seems very hacky and Solr is still having to run a search against my dummy value. A roundabout way of asking: how can I fire off *just* a spell check query? Thanks in advance -Rupert
Re: exceeded limit of maxWarmingSearchers
I'd say: Make sure you don't commit more frequently than the time it takes for your searcher to warm up, or else you risk searcher overlap and pile-up. Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch From: Jon Drukman jdruk...@gmail.com To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Thursday, February 5, 2009 11:36:13 AM Subject: Re: exceeded limit of maxWarmingSearchers Otis Gospodnetic wrote: Jon, If you can, don't commit on every update and that should help or fully solve your problem. is there any sort of heuristic or formula i can apply that can tell me when to commit? put it in a cron job and fire it once per hour? there are certain updates that are critical - we store privacy settings on certain data in the doc. if the user says that document 10 is private, we need to have the update reflected immediately. is there any way to have solr block everything until an update is committed? -jsd-
Re: Issuing just a spell check query
But its deprecated (??) -Rupert On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Otis Gospodnetic otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com wrote: Rupert, You could use the SpellCheck*Handler* to achieve this. Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch From: Rupert Fiasco rufia...@gmail.com To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 2:47:19 PM Subject: Issuing just a spell check query The docs for the SpellCheckComponent say The SpellCheckComponent is designed to provide inline spell checking of queries without having to issue separate requests. I would like to issue just a spell check query, I dont care about it being inline and piggy-backing off a normal search query. How would I achieve this? I tried monkeying with making a new requestHandler but using class = solr.SearchHandler always tries to do a normal search. I succeeded in adding inline spell checking to the default request handler by *adding* arr name=last-components strspellcheck/str /arr to its requestHandler config - I would like to *remove* the default search component - maybe by making a new request handler which just does spell checking? Is something like this possible? requestHandler name=/spellcheck class=solr.SearchHandler !-- default values for query parameters -- lst name=defaults str name=spellcheck.count5/str /lst arr name=first-components strspellcheck/str /arr !-- remove default search component -- arr name=remove-components strdefault/str /arr /requestHandler Now, I can sort of achieve what I want by in fact a normal search but then using a dummy value for my q parameter (for me 00 works) and then I get no search docs back, but I do get the spell suggestions I want, driven by the spellcheck.q parameter. But this seems very hacky and Solr is still having to run a search against my dummy value. A roundabout way of asking: how can I fire off *just* a spell check query? Thanks in advance -Rupert
Re: Realtime Searching..
Thanks Otis, Is it possible to get my hands on the ability in lucene utilizing patches before it is released to the public? (sorry to ask) - How close is it in the source code if I didn't care about the documentation/packaging/etc..? So from what it sounds like, this would be a realtime store(with great search) that could be used instead of a database or in conjunction? Is it wrong to say it's similar to bigtable from google in keeping realtime data in a non relational way but with a better search? Thanks On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Otis Gospodnetic otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com wrote: Michael, The short answer is that Solr is not there yet, but will be. Expect to see real-time search in Lucene first, then in Solr. We have a case study about real-time search with Lucene in the upcoming Lucene in Action 2, but a more tightly integrated real-time search will be added to Lucene down the road (and then Solr). In the mean time you can use the trick of one large and less frequently updated core and one small and more frequently updated core + distributed search across them. Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch From: Michael Austin mausti...@gmail.com To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 1:02:43 PM Subject: Realtime Searching.. I need to find a solution for our current social application. It's low traffic now because we are early on.. However I'm expecting and want to be prepaired to grow. We have messages of different types that are aggregated into one stream. Each of these message types have much different data so that our main queries have a few unions and many joins. I know that Solr would work great for searching but we need a realtime system (twitter-like) to view user updates. I'm not interested in a few minutes delay; I need something that will be fast updating and searchable and have n columns per record/document. Can solor do this? what is Ocean? Thanks
Re: Issuing just a spell check query
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Rupert Fiasco rufia...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to issue just a spell check query, I dont care about it being inline and piggy-backing off a normal search query. How would I achieve this? Now, I can sort of achieve what I want by in fact a normal search but then using a dummy value for my q parameter (for me 00 works) and then I get no search docs back, but I do get the spell suggestions I want, driven by the spellcheck.q parameter. But this seems very hacky and Solr is still having to run a search against my dummy value. A roundabout way of asking: how can I fire off *just* a spell check query? I don't think it is possible with SpellCheckComponent. But note that only the first search pays the price, if you don't change (q, sort, rows, count) then subsequent queries hit the cache. So I'd suggest you search for a dummy value (or *:*), make fl=your_unique_key (for minimal payload) and ignore the documents returned. -- Regards, Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
Re: Realtime Searching..
Just to back up and think about if solr/lucene realtime updating is what I want to begin with.. Would this be something that a twitter type system might use to be more scalable and fast? Let's just say that I have a site with as much message traffic as twitter and I want to be able to update and search fast/realtime. Would this be the path you would initially send me? For example, do you know of a system out there that does memcached type fast caching and lookup but has the ability to look them up with sorting and filtering? Thanks
Searching on field A gives spurious highlights in field B
Hello all. First post to the list. I noticed that if I search for foo:blahhl.fl=bar, I get highlight output for instances of blah in field bar. Is there any way to avoid that? I'm using solr 1.3. -jwb
Re: Searching on field A gives spurious highlights in field B
On 6-Feb-09, at 12:34 PM, Jeffrey Baker wrote: Hello all. First post to the list. Welcome aboard. I noticed that if I search for foo:blahhl.fl=bar, I get highlight output for instances of blah in field bar. Is there any way to avoid that? I'm using solr 1.3. Try hl.requireFieldMatch=true http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HighlightingParameters -Mike
Re: Searching on field A gives spurious highlights in field B
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:36 PM, Mike Klaas mike.kl...@gmail.com wrote: On 6-Feb-09, at 12:34 PM, Jeffrey Baker wrote: Hello all. First post to the list. Welcome aboard. I noticed that if I search for foo:blahhl.fl=bar, I get highlight output for instances of blah in field bar. Is there any way to avoid that? I'm using solr 1.3. Try hl.requireFieldMatch=true Thanks a lot. I must have mentally skipped that one a dozen times. -jwb
Re: Realtime Searching..
Michael, There is no single system that will provide Twitter like functionality. You'd have to look into Lucene/Solr for searching, memcached (for example) for caching, maybe caching layer in front of Solr (e.g. varnish, squid, apache), something to store the data in (e.g. RDBMS, HBase, HDFS, depending on your precise needs), etc. Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch From: Michael Austin mausti...@gmail.com To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 3:18:44 PM Subject: Re: Realtime Searching.. Just to back up and think about if solr/lucene realtime updating is what I want to begin with.. Would this be something that a twitter type system might use to be more scalable and fast? Let's just say that I have a site with as much message traffic as twitter and I want to be able to update and search fast/realtime. Would this be the path you would initially send me? For example, do you know of a system out there that does memcached type fast caching and lookup but has the ability to look them up with sorting and filtering? Thanks
Searchers in single/multi-core environments
Hello, My apologies if this topic has already been discussed but I haven't been able to find a lot of information in the wiki or mailing lists. I am looking for more information about how searchers work in different environments. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but my understanding is that in a single core environment, there is one searcher for the one index which handles all queries. When a commit occurs, a new searcher is opened up on the index during the commit. The old searcher is still available until the commit finishes, at which point the active searcher becomes the new one and the old searcher is destroyed. This is the purpose of the maxWarmingSearchers argument -- it is the total number of searchers that can be open in memory at any given point. What I'm not sure about is how this number could ever be greater than 2 in a single core environment -- unless another commit is sent before the new searcher finishes warming? What I'm also curious about is how searchers are handled in a multi-core environment. Does the maxWarmSearchers argument apply to the entire set of cores, or to each individual core? If the latter, how is this handled if each core uses a different solrconfig.xml and has a different value for maxWarmSearchers? Thanks for any information that you can provide. Mark
Re: Searchers in single/multi-core environments
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 2:51 AM, Mark Ferguson mark.a.fergu...@gmail.comwrote: I am looking for more information about how searchers work in different environments. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but my understanding is that in a single core environment, there is one searcher for the one index which handles all queries. When a commit occurs, a new searcher is opened up on the index during the commit. The old searcher is still available until the commit finishes, at which point the active searcher becomes the new one and the old searcher is destroyed. After commit is called, the postCommit/postOptimize hooks are executed (in the same thread which called the commit). Then, in a new thread, a new searcher is opened, auto-warming is performed, newSearcher event listeners are executed and the new searcher is registered (i.e. it replaces the old searcher). If useColdSearcher is true then the auto-warming is skipped. If waitSearcher=false then the commit thread blocks until these operations finish. The old searcher is available until all it finishes all the requests it had already received until the new searcher got registered. This is the purpose of the maxWarmingSearchers argument -- it is the total number of searchers that can be open in memory at any given point. Not the total number of searchers but the total number of on-deck (warming) searchers. So, total number of searchers will be maxWarmingSearchers + 1 (for the current registered searcher) What I'm not sure about is how this number could ever be greater than 2 in a single core environment -- unless another commit is sent before the new searcher finishes warming? Correct. If warming or the newSearcher event listener takes a lot of time and you call commit again, another searcher will be created. What I'm also curious about is how searchers are handled in a multi-core environment. Does the maxWarmSearchers argument apply to the entire set of cores, or to each individual core? It applied to one core unless ofcourse, you are sharing the solrconfig.xml with multiple cores. Also, if you call core reload, a new core is created (with its own searcher) which replaces the old core. If the latter, how is this handled if each core uses a different solrconfig.xml and has a different value for maxWarmSearchers? Each core maintains its configuration separately in memory. Configuration is not shared between cores (except for the configuration in solr.xml) Hope that helps. -- Regards, Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
Decrease warmupTime
First, I'm new Solr.
I have setup a Solr server and added some documents into it. I noticed that as
I added more and more docs, the warmupTime became longer and longer. After
added 400K docs, I can see the warmupTime is now about 1 minutes. Here is one
log entry:
queryResultCache{lookups=0,hits=0,hitratio=0.00,inserts=6,evictions=0,size=6,warmupTime=56687,cumulative_lookups=2,
cumulative_hits=0,cumulative_hitratio=0.00,cumulative_inserts=2,cumulative_evictions=0}
If I try to insert more docs before warmupTime ends, I will get exception.
Is there any way to decrease this warmupTime?
Thanks a lot,
Kevin
Re: Searchers in single/multi-core environments
What I'm also curious about is how searchers are handled in a multi-core environment. Does the maxWarmSearchers argument apply to the entire set of cores, or to each individual core? It applied to one core unless ofcourse, you are sharing the solrconfig.xml with multiple cores. Also, if you call core reload, a new core is created (with its own searcher) which replaces the old core. Thanks very much for your time and explanation, it is a huge help. Just to clarify that I am understanding correctly... For example then, if I have 10 cores, and maxWarmSearchers is 2 for each core, if I send a commit to all of them at once this will not cause any exceptions, because each core handles its searchers separately? Mark
Re: Searchers in single/multi-core environments
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 3:44 AM, Mark Ferguson mark.a.fergu...@gmail.comwrote: For example then, if I have 10 cores, and maxWarmSearchers is 2 for each core, if I send a commit to all of them at once this will not cause any exceptions, because each core handles its searchers separately? Correct. Though it is a good idea to have a small gap between commits on each core so that you don't run into resource issues (depending on how intensive is your postCommit/auto-warming/newSearcher) -- Regards, Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
Re: Decrease warmupTime
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Cheng Zhang zhangyongji...@yahoo.com wrote: Is there any way to decrease this warmupTime? Go into solrconfig.xml and reduce (or eliminate) the autowarm counts for the caches. -Yonik
Re: Decrease warmupTime
Hi Yonik,
I just changed the autowarmCount for queryResultCache but it did not work. In
the log, it still shows warmupTime for autowarmCount is about 45 seconds.
queryResultCache{lookups=0,hits=0,hitratio=0.00,inserts=6,evictions=0,size=6,warmupTime=44055,cumulative_lookups=1,cumulative_hits=0,cumulative_hitratio=0.00,cumulative_inserts=1,cumulative_evictions=0}
Any other suggestion?
Thanks a lot,
Kevin
- Original Message
From: Yonik Seeley ysee...@gmail.com
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 5:18:47 PM
Subject: Re: Decrease warmupTime
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Cheng Zhang zhangyongji...@yahoo.com wrote:
Is there any way to decrease this warmupTime?
Go into solrconfig.xml and reduce (or eliminate) the autowarm counts
for the caches.
-Yonik
Re: Decrease warmupTime
Have you restarted Solr after you made the change?
Can you paste your query result cache config?
Otis
--
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
From: Cheng Zhang zhangyongji...@yahoo.com
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 11:04:07 PM
Subject: Re: Decrease warmupTime
Hi Yonik,
I just changed the autowarmCount for queryResultCache but it did not work. In
the log, it still shows warmupTime for autowarmCount is about 45 seconds.
queryResultCache{lookups=0,hits=0,hitratio=0.00,inserts=6,evictions=0,size=6,warmupTime=44055,cumulative_lookups=1,cumulative_hits=0,cumulative_hitratio=0.00,cumulative_inserts=1,cumulative_evictions=0}
Any other suggestion?
Thanks a lot,
Kevin
- Original Message
From: Yonik Seeley ysee...@gmail.com
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 5:18:47 PM
Subject: Re: Decrease warmupTime
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Cheng Zhang zhangyongji...@yahoo.com wrote:
Is there any way to decrease this warmupTime?
Go into solrconfig.xml and reduce (or eliminate) the autowarm counts
for the caches.
-Yonik
Re: Decrease warmupTime
I did restart the solr server. Here is the config.
filterCache
class=solr.LRUCache
size=512
initialSize=512
autowarmCount=128/
!-- queryResultCache caches results of searches - ordered lists of
document ids (DocList) based on a query, a sort, and the range
of documents requested. --
queryResultCache
class=solr.LRUCache
size=512
initialSize=512
autowarmCount=0/
!-- documentCache caches Lucene Document objects (the stored fields for each
document).
Since Lucene internal document ids are transient, this cache will not be
autowarmed. --
documentCache
class=solr.LRUCache
size=512
initialSize=512
autowarmCount=0/
Thx.
- Original Message
From: Otis Gospodnetic otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 10:40:45 PM
Subject: Re: Decrease warmupTime
Have you restarted Solr after you made the change?
Can you paste your query result cache config?
Otis
--
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
From: Cheng Zhang zhangyongji...@yahoo.com
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 11:04:07 PM
Subject: Re: Decrease warmupTime
Hi Yonik,
I just changed the autowarmCount for queryResultCache but it did not work. In
the log, it still shows warmupTime for autowarmCount is about 45 seconds.
queryResultCache{lookups=0,hits=0,hitratio=0.00,inserts=6,evictions=0,size=6,warmupTime=44055,cumulative_lookups=1,cumulative_hits=0,cumulative_hitratio=0.00,cumulative_inserts=1,cumulative_evictions=0}
Any other suggestion?
Thanks a lot,
Kevin
- Original Message
From: Yonik Seeley ysee...@gmail.com
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2009 5:18:47 PM
Subject: Re: Decrease warmupTime
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Cheng Zhang zhangyongji...@yahoo.com wrote:
Is there any way to decrease this warmupTime?
Go into solrconfig.xml and reduce (or eliminate) the autowarm counts
for the caches.
-Yonik
