Hi Erick and Michael,
It's not asterisk at all. Sorry to confuse you guys, it's actually
*dot *letter.
I put it that way because it contains quite a lot of fields there.
The reason I'm doing that is because I have some string fields and
non-string fields. The idea is to send quoted value to
Couple questions:
1) Why are you explicitly telling solr to sort by score desc,
shouldn't it do that for you? Could this be a source of performance
problems since sorting requires the loading of the field caches?
2) Of the query parameters, q1 and q2, which one is actually doing
text searching on
Hello all,
I am curious to know how people are using Solr in conjunction with
other data stores when building search engines to power web sites (say
an ecommerce site). The question I have for the group is given an
architecture where the primary (transactional) data store is MySQL
(Oracle,
Amit,
not exactly a response to your question but doing this with a lucene index on
i2geo.net has resulted in considerably performance boost (reading from
stored-fields instead of reading from the xwiki objects which pull from the SQL
database). However, it implied that we had to rewrite
Thanks a lot, Amit! Please bear with me, I am a new Solr dev, could you
please shed me some light on how to use a patch? point me to a wiki/doc is
fine too. Thanks a lot! :)
--
View this message in context:
Hello all,
I came about an odd issue today when I wanted to add ca. 7M documents to my
Solr index: I got a SolrServerException telling me No space left on device. I
had a look at the directory Solr (and its index) is installed in and there is
plenty space (~300GB).
I then noticed a file named
MoreLikeThis can return the matched doc. My question is that can i somehow
pass in a query param to indicate that i would like to filter on a field
value of the matched doc? Is this doable? Or, if not doable, what's the work
around? Thanks a lot!
--
View this message in context:
very well explained. However, you dont know the number (integer/float) field
value of a matched in advance. So even suppose the Similarity field is
constructed, how to use it in the query?
--
View this message in context:
Hi,
Does anybody know why hyphen '-' and q.op=AND causes such a big difference
between the two queries? I thought hyphens are removed by StandardTokenizer
which means theoretically the two queries should be the same!
Thanks
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Alireza Salimi
FYI,
If denormalization doesn't work for you, check index time join
http://blog.mikemccandless.com/2012/01/searching-relational-content-with.html.
here is the scratch for query and index time support:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3076
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3535
It's hard to troubleshoot without debug logs. Pls pay attention that
regular configuration for CachedSqlEP is slightly different
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DataImportHandler#CachedSqlEntityProcessor
see
where=xid=x.id
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 2:29 AM, ps_sra praveens1...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi,
I am facing an identical problem. Does anyone have any pointers on this ?
Regards,
Tushar
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Elevation-togehter-with-grouping-tp3916981p3992925.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
If a user writes a query Apples Oranges the word delimiter filter
factory will change this into Apples Oranges
Which isn't very useful for me as I'd prefer especially when the phrase is
wrapped in quotes that the original is preserved.
However I still want to be able to separate ApplesOranges
Hi,
is there an easy way to get the matches of an OR query?
If I'm searching for android OR google OR apple OR iphone OR -ipod,
I'd like to know which of these terms document X contains.
I've been using debugQuery and tried to extract the info from the
explain information, unfortunately this is
That's a perfectly reasonable request. But, WDF doesn't have such a feature.
Maybe what is needed is a distinct ampersand filter that runs before WDF
and detects ampersands that are likely shorthands for and and expands
them. It would also need to be able to detect ATT (capital letter before
All,
I am using apache-solr-4.0.0-ALPHA and trying to configure the Partial
search on two fields.
Keywords using to search are
The value inside the search ProdSymbl is M1.6X0.35 9P
and I illl have to get the results if I search for M1.6 or X0.35 (Partial
of the search value).
I have tried
Hi,
I have the following problem.
I would like to give a boost to the whole documents as I index them. I am
sending to solr xml in the form:
adddoc boost=2.0/doc/add
But it does't seem to alter the search scores in any way. I would expect
that to multiply the final search score by two, am I
Hi,
I'm trying to make a facet search on a multiple value field and add a filter
query on it and it doesn't work.
Could you please help me find my mistake ?
Here is my solr query :
facet=true,sort=publishingdate desc,facet.mincount=1,q=service:1 AND
I'm using SOLR 3.3 and would like to know how to return a list of dynamic
fields in my search results using a wildcard with the fl parameter. I found
SOLR-2444 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2444 but this
appears to be for SOLR 4.0. Am I correct in assuming this isn't doable yet?
explanation of the cause:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/1/203
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Óscar Marín Miró
oscarmarinm...@gmail.comwrote:
So, this was the solution, sorry to post it so late, just in case it helps
anyone:
/etc/init.d/ntp stop; date; date `date +%m%d%H%M%C%y.%S`; date;
This appears to be the case. * is the only wildcard supported by fl
before 4.0.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Josh Harness
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 9:08 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: fl Parameter and Wildcards for Dynamic Fields
I'm using SOLR 3.3
First, OR -ipod needs to be written as OR (*:* -ipod) due to an ongoing
deficiency in Lucene query parsing, but I wonder what you really think you
are OR'ing in that clause - all documents that don't contain ipod? That
seems odd. Maybe you really want to constrain the preceding query to exclude
Currently all Javadoc links seem to wind up pointing at the api-4_0_0-ALPHA
versions - is that expected?
E.g. do a Google search on StreamingUpdateSolrServer. First hit is for
StreamingUpdateSolrServer (Solr 3.6.0 API)
Follow that link, and you get a 404 for page
Hi!
On 4 July 2012 17:01, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.com wrote:
First, OR -ipod needs to be written as OR (*:* -ipod) due to an ongoing
deficiency in Lucene query parsing, but I wonder what you really think you
are OR'ing in that clause - all documents that don't contain ipod? That
You could always do a custom search component, but all the same information
(which terms matched) is in the debugQuery. For example,
queryWeight(text:the) indicates that the appears in the document.
What exactly is it that is too slow?
Yes, you do have to accept that explain uses analyzed
solr.**PatternReplaceCharFilterFactor**y is a brilliant idea, thanks so
much :)
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.comwrote:
That's a perfectly reasonable request. But, WDF doesn't have such a
feature.
Maybe what is needed is a distinct ampersand filter that
Hi guys,
I have the following problem.
I would like to give a boost to the whole documents as I index them. I am
sending to solr the xml in the form:
adddoc boost=2.0/doc/add
But it does't seem to alter the search scores in any way. I would expect
that to multiply the final search score by
Solr is probably simply using Java's temp directory, which you can redefine
by setting the java.io.tmpdir system property on the java command line or
using a system-specific environment variable.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Erik Fäßler
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012
1. The useless combination of stored=false and indexed=false is useful to
ignore fields. You might have input data which has fields that you have
decided to ignore.
2. Stored fields take up memory for documents (fields) to be returned for
search results in the Solr query response, so fewer
Terms with embedded special characters are treated as phrases with spaces in
place of the special characters. So, gb-mb is treated as if you had
enclosed the term in quotes.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Alireza Salimi
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 6:50 AM
To:
Wow, I didn't know that. Is there a way to disable this feature? I mean, is
it something coming from the Analyzer?
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.comwrote:
Terms with embedded special characters are treated as phrases with spaces
in place of the special
Make sure to review the similarity javadoc page to understand what any of
these factors does to the document score.
See:
http://lucene.apache.org/core/3_6_0/api/all/org/apache/lucene/search/Similarity.html
Sure, a document boost applies a multiplicative factor, but that is all
relative to all
Greetings,
I'm wondering if anybody has experienced (and found root cause) for errors
like this. We're running Solr 3.6.0 with latest stable Jetty 7
(7.6.4.v20120524).
I know this is likely due to a client (or the server) terminating the
connection unexpectedly, but we see these fairly frequently
: Currently all Javadoc links seem to wind up pointing at the api-4_0_0-ALPHA
versions - is that expected?
yes.
/solr/api has always pointed at the javadocs for the most recent
release of solr. All that's changed now is that we host multiple copies
of hte javadocs (just like Lucene-Core
There is one other detail that should clarify the situation. At query time,
the query parser itself is breaking your query into space-delimited terms,
and only calling the analyzer for each of those terms, each of which will be
treated as if a quoted phrase. So it doesn't matter whether it is
ok, so how can I prevent this behavior to happen?
As you can see the parsed query is very different in these two cases.
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.comwrote:
There is one other detail that should clarify the situation. At query
time, the query parser
Should there be made any modification into scheme.xml file?
For example, to enable field boosts, one has to set omitNorms to false.
Is there some similar field for document boosts?
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.comwrote:
Make sure to review the similarity
Could anyone please reply the solution to this
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 7:18 PM, jayakeerthi s mail2keer...@gmail.comwrote:
All,
I am using apache-solr-4.0.0-ALPHA and trying to configure the Partial
search on two fields.
Keywords using to search are
The value inside the search ProdSymbl is
No worries! What version of Solr are you using? One that you
downloaded as a tarball or one that you checked out from SVN (trunk)?
I'll take a bit of time and document steps and respond.
I'll review the patch to see that it fits a general case. Question for
you with MLT, are your users doing a
You need to apply the edge n-gram filter only at index time, not at query
time. So, you need to specify two analyzers for these field types, an
index and a query analyzer. They should be roughly the same, but the
query analyzer would not have the edge n-gram filter since you are
accepting the
Paul,
Thanks for your response! Were you using the SQL database as an object
store to pull XWiki objects or did you have to execute several queries
to reconstruct these objects? I don't know much about them sorry..
Also for those responding, can you provide a few basic metrics for me?
1) Number
You could pre-process your queries to convert hyphen and other special
characters to spaces.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Alireza Salimi
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 12:56 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Synonyms and hyphens
ok, so how can I prevent
Le 4 juil. 2012 à 21:17, Amit Nithian a écrit :
Thanks for your response! Were you using the SQL database as an object
store to pull XWiki objects or did you have to execute several queries
to reconstruct these objects?
The first. It's all fairly transparent.
There are XWiki Classes and XWiki
Hi Jack,
Many thanks for your reply...
yes i have tried both ngram and Edgegram filterfactory, still no result.
Please le t me know any alternatives
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Jack Krupansky j...@basetechnology.comwrote:
You need to apply the edge n-gram filter only at index time, not at
Don't forget to test your field type analyzers on the Solr Admin analysis
page. It will show you exactly how terms gets analyzed at both index and
query time.
If something is not working, be specific as to what the case is and exactly
what is not as you would expect, both the expected value
I'm not completely sure. I wouldn't expect that document boost should
require field norms, but glancing at the code, it seems that having
omitNorms=true does mean that the score for a field will not get the
document boost, and in fact such a field gets a constant score. In other
words, that
Amit, I am using Solr3.6 and directly imported apache-solr-3.6.0.war into
Eclipse (Indigo). I will need to directly invoke a MoreLikeThis(/mlt) call
using a unique id to get MoreLikeThis results.
The hard part is that I need to use a float number field (that i cannot use
mlt.fl or mlt.fq since
Hi,
Sorry for this post, but im having a hard time getting my head around this.
I installed Solr on Tomcat and it seems to work fine. I get the solr admin
page and the it works page from tomcat.
When I try to query my solr server I get this message:
*Internal Server Error
The server
Check your /var/log/tomcat*/. It logs to a catalina.out file unless you
modified log4j.properties.
-Original message-
From:Spadez james_will...@hotmail.com
Sent: Thu 05-Jul-2012 00:36
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Internal Error 500 - How to diagnose?
Hi,
Sorry
Thank you, the query seems to have got through, thats good i guess?
*Jul 4, 2012 6:32:34 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore execute
INFO: [] webapp=/solr path=/select
Eclipse and IntelliJ have remote debugging for tomcat. Sometime it is
the only way.
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Spadez james_will...@hotmail.com wrote:
Thank you, the query seems to have got through, thats good i guess?
*Jul 4, 2012 6:32:34 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore execute
INFO:
Would all optional fields need the sortmissinglast and sortmissingfirst set
even when not sorting on that field? Seems broken to me.
Sent from my Mobile device
720-256-8076
On Jul 3, 2012, at 6:45 AM, Shubham Srivastava
shubham.srivast...@makemytrip.com wrote:
Just adding to the below-- If
Hi mcb
You're looking for spatial clustering. I answered this question yesterday
on Stack Overflow:
http://stackoverflow.com/a/11321723/92186
~ David Smiley
-
Author: http://www.packtpub.com/apache-solr-3-enterprise-search-server/book
--
View this message in context:
Please someone can help me,
we are a team waiting for a fix.
We try several ways to implement it without success.
Thanks for reading anyway, David.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-facet-multiple-constraint-tp3992974p3993119.html
Sent from the Solr -
On 7/4/2012 1:54 AM, Amit Nithian wrote:
I am curious to know how people are using Solr in conjunction with
other data stores when building search engines to power web sites (say
an ecommerce site). The question I have for the group is given an
architecture where the primary (transactional) data
55 matches
Mail list logo
