Group count in SOLR 3.3
Hi guys, we are using SOLR 3.3 with Solrj inside our java project. In actual version we had to add some grouping support, so we add parameters into SolrQuery object like this: query.setParam(GroupParams.GROUP, true); query.setParam(GroupParams.GROUP_MAIN, true); query.setParam(GroupParams.GROUP_FIELD, OUR_GROUP_FIELD); and we get QueryResponse with results we need. Awesome! But now I have one remaining problem, I don't know how get number of groups from QueryResponse. I found I must add group.ngroups=true param into query. So I did it: query.setParam(GroupParams.GROUP_TOTAL_COUNT, true); But QueryResponse seems same. There's no method like getGroupCount() or group count param in header. Am I doing something wrong? Or is it SOLR 3.3 problem? If we upgrade to newer version, will it works? Thanks for any advice! Roman
Re: Querying top n of each facet value
Hello Kiran, I think you can try turning grouping on and group on, and ask solr to group on the Category field. Nevertheless, this will *not* ensure you that groups are returned in facet counts order. This will *not* ensure you the mincount per group neither. Hope this helps, -- Tanguy 2012/8/23 Kiran Jayakumar kiranjuni...@gmail.com Hi everyone, I am building an auto complete feature, which facets by a field called Category. I want to return a minimum number of documents per facet (say min=1 max=5). The facet output is something like Category A: 500 B: 10 C: 2 By default, it is returning 10 documents of category A. I want it to return a total of 10 documents, with 1 document atleast for each facet value. Is it possible to accomplish that with a single query ? Thanks
Can't extract Outlook message files
Hi. We're trying to use the following Curl command to perform an extract only of *.MSG file, but it blows up: curl http://localhost:8983/solr/update/extract?extractOnly=true; -F myfile=@92.msg If we do this, it works fine: curl http://localhost:8983/solr/update/extract?literal.id=doc1commit=true; -F myfile=@92.msg We've tried a variety of MSG files and they all produce the same error; they all have content in them. What are we doing wrong? Here's the exception the extractOnly=true command generates: html head meta http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1/ titleError 500 null org.apache.solr.common.SolrException at org.apache.solr.handler.extraction.ExtractingDocumentLoader.load(Extr actingDocumentLoader.java:233) at org.apache.solr.handler.ContentStreamHandlerBase.handleRequestBody(Co ntentStreamHandlerBase.java:58) at org.apache.solr.handler.RequestHandlerBase.handleRequest(RequestHandl erBase.java:129) at org.apache.solr.core.RequestHandlers$LazyRequestHandlerWrapper.handle Request(RequestHandlers.java:244) at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.execute(SolrCore.java:1376) at org.apache.solr.servlet.SolrDispatchFilter.execute(SolrDispatchFilter .java:365) at org.apache.solr.servlet.SolrDispatchFilter.doFilter(SolrDispatchFilte r.java:260) at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler$CachedChain.doFilter(Servlet Handler.java:1212) at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.ServletHandler.handle(ServletHandler.java:3 99) at org.mortbay.jetty.security.SecurityHandler.handle(SecurityHandler.jav a:216) at org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.SessionHandler.handle(SessionHandler.java:1 82) at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.ContextHandler.handle(ContextHandler.java:7 66) at org.mortbay.jetty.webapp.WebAppContext.handle(WebAppContext.java:450) at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.ContextHandlerCollection.handle(ContextHand lerCollection.java:230) at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.HandlerCollection.handle(HandlerCollection. java:114) at org.mortbay.jetty.handler.HandlerWrapper.handle(HandlerWrapper.java:1 52) at org.mortbay.jetty.Server.handle(Server.java:326) at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection.handleRequest(HttpConnection.java:54 2) at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection$RequestHandler.content(HttpConnectio n.java:945) at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpParser.parseNext(HttpParser.java:756) at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpParser.parseAvailable(HttpParser.java:212) at org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection.handle(HttpConnection.java:404) at org.mortbay.jetty.bio.SocketConnector$Connection.run(SocketConnector. java:228) at org.mortbay.thread.QueuedThreadPool$PoolThread.run(QueuedThreadPool.j ava:582) Caused by: org.apache.tika.exception.TikaException: Unexpected RuntimeException from org.apache.tika.parser.microsoft.OfficeParser@aaf063 at org.apache.tika.parser.CompositeParser.parse(CompositeParser.java:244 ) at org.apache.tika.parser.CompositeParser.parse(CompositeParser.java:242 ) at org.apache.tika.parser.AutoDetectParser.parse(AutoDetectParser.java:1 20) at org.apache.solr.handler.extraction.ExtractingDocumentLoader.load(Extr actingDocumentLoader.java:227) ... 23 more Caused by: java.lang.IllegalStateException: Internal: Internal error: element st ate is zero. at org.apache.xml.serialize.BaseMarkupSerializer.leaveElementState(Unkno wn Source) at org.apache.xml.serialize.XMLSerializer.endElementIO(Unknown Source) at org.apache.xml.serialize.XMLSerializer.endElement(Unknown Source) at org.apache.tika.sax.ContentHandlerDecorator.endElement(ContentHandler Decorator.java:136) at org.apache.tika.sax.SecureContentHandler.endElement(SecureContentHand ler.java:256) at org.apache.tika.sax.ContentHandlerDecorator.endElement(ContentHandler Decorator.java:136) at org.apache.tika.sax.ContentHandlerDecorator.endElement(ContentHandler Decorator.java:136) at org.apache.tika.sax.ContentHandlerDecorator.endElement(ContentHandler Decorator.java:136) at org.apache.tika.sax.SafeContentHandler.endElement(SafeContentHandler. java:273) at org.apache.tika.sax.XHTMLContentHandler.endDocument(XHTMLContentHandl er.java:213) at org.apache.tika.parser.microsoft.OfficeParser.parse(OfficeParser.java :178) at org.apache.tika.parser.CompositeParser.parse(CompositeParser.java:242 ) ... 26 more /title /head bodyh2HTTP ERROR 500/h2 pProblem accessing /solr/update/extract. Reason: prenull org.apache.solr.common.SolrException at org.apache.solr.handler.extraction.ExtractingDocumentLoader.load(Extr actingDocumentLoader.java:233) at org.apache.solr.handler.ContentStreamHandlerBase.handleRequestBody(Co ntentStreamHandlerBase.java:58) at org.apache.solr.handler.RequestHandlerBase.handleRequest(RequestHandl erBase.java:129)
Re: javabin binary format specification
There is no spec documented anywhere . It is all in this single file https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/dev/trunk/solr/solrj/src/java/org/apache/solr/common/util/JavaBinCodec.java On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com wrote: Sorry, but I could not find any spec on the binary format SolrJ is using. Can you point me to an URL if any? may be this? https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/dev/trunk/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/response/BinaryResponseWriter.java -- - Noble Paul
in solr4.0 where to set dataimport.properties
i am not find where to set dataimport.properties in solr4.0 beta who can help me ? -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/in-solr4-0-where-to-set-dataimport-properties-tp4002766.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
where to set dataimport.properties in solr4.0 beta
dataimport.properties : interval=1 port= server=localhost doc.id= params=/select?qt\=/dataimportcommand\=delta-importclean\=falsecommit\=true webapp=solr syncEnabled=1 last_index_time=2012-06-27 13\:05\:18 doc.last_index_time=2012-06-27 13\:05\:18 syncCores= how to set these in solr4.0 , Please be specific, thanks -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/where-to-set-dataimport-properties-in-solr4-0-beta-tp4002767.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: search is slow for URL fields of type String.
Srini, Whats the size of your index? You are saying that searching on 'string' fieldType takes 400 milli seconds but did you try searching on any other fieldType other than string? If so, how much time did it take? On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:35 AM, srinalluri nallurisr...@yahoo.com wrote: This is string fieldType: fieldType name=string class=solr.StrField sortMissingLast=true / These are the filelds using 'string' fieldType: field name=image_url type=string indexed=true stored=true multiValued=true / field name=url type=string indexed=true stored=true multiValued=true / And this the sample query: /select/?q=url:http\:// www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/08/10/social-change-coming-from-gas-prices-to-rent-prices-and-beyond/ AND image_url:* Each query like this taking around 400 milli seconds. What are the change I can do to the fieldType to improve query performance? thanks Srini -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/search-is-slow-for-URL-fields-of-type-String-tp4002662.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Problem to start solr-4.0.0-BETA with tomcat-6.0.20
First, I'm no Tomcat expert here's the Tomcat Solr
page, but you've probably already seen it:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrTomcat
But I'm guessing that you may have old jars around
somewhere and things are getting confused. I'd
blow away the whole thing and start over, whenever
I start copying jars around I always lose track of
what's where.
Have you successfully had any other Solr operate
under Tomcat?
Sorry I can't be more help
Erick
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Claudio Ranieri
claudio.rani...@estadao.com wrote:
Hi,
I tried to start the solr-4.0.0-BETA with tomcat-6.0.20 but does not work.
I copied the apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA.war to $TOMCAT_HOME/webapps. Then I
copied the directory apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA\example\solr to
C:\home\solr-4.0-beta and adjusted the file
$TOMCAT_HOME\conf\Catalina\localhost\apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA.xml to point the
solr/home to C:/home/solr-4.0-beta. With this configuration, when I startup
tomcat I got:
SEVERE: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Invalid luceneMatchVersion
'LUCENE_40', valid values are: [LUCENE_20, LUCENE_21, LUCENE_22, LUCENE_23,
LUCENE_24, LUCENE_29, LUCENE_30, LUCENE_31, LUCENE_32, LUCENE_33, LUCENE_34,
LUCENE_35, LUCENE_36, LUCENE_CURRENT ] or a string in format 'VV'
So I changed the line in solrconfig.xml:
luceneMatchVersionLUCENE_40/luceneMatchVersion
to
luceneMatchVersionLUCENE_CURRENT/luceneMatchVersion
So I got a new error:
Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: solr.NRTCachingDirectoryFactory
This class is within the file apache-solr-core-4.0.0-BETA.jar but for some
reason classloader of the class is not loaded. I then moved all jars in
$TOMCAT_HOME\webapps\apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA\WEB-INF\lib to $TOMCAT_HOME\lib.
After this setup, I got a new error:
SEVERE: java.lang.ClassCastException:
org.apache.solr.core.NRTCachingDirectoryFactory can not be cast to
org.apache.solr.core.DirectoryFactory
So I changed the line in solrconfig.xml:
directoryFactory name=DirectoryFactory
class=${solr.directoryFactory:solr.NRTCachingDirectoryFactory}/
to
directoryFactory name=DirectoryFactory
class=${solr.directoryFactory:solr.NIOFSDirectoryFactory}/
So I got a new error:
Caused by: java.lang.ClassCastException:
org.apache.solr.spelling.DirectSolrSpellChecker can not be cast to
org.apache.solr.spelling.SolrSpellChecker
How can I resolve the problem of classloader?
How can I resolve the problem of cast of NRTCachingDirectoryFactory and
DirectSolrSpellChecker?
I can not startup the solr 4.0 beta with tomcat.
Thanks,
Re: Problem to start solr-4.0.0-BETA with tomcat-6.0.20
Not sure if this can help. But once I had a similar problem with Solr 3.6.0
where tomcat refused to find one of the classes that existed. I deleted the
tomcat's webapp directory and then it worked fine.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.comwrote:
First, I'm no Tomcat expert here's the Tomcat Solr
page, but you've probably already seen it:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrTomcat
But I'm guessing that you may have old jars around
somewhere and things are getting confused. I'd
blow away the whole thing and start over, whenever
I start copying jars around I always lose track of
what's where.
Have you successfully had any other Solr operate
under Tomcat?
Sorry I can't be more help
Erick
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Claudio Ranieri
claudio.rani...@estadao.com wrote:
Hi,
I tried to start the solr-4.0.0-BETA with tomcat-6.0.20 but does not
work.
I copied the apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA.war to $TOMCAT_HOME/webapps. Then I
copied the directory apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA\example\solr to
C:\home\solr-4.0-beta and adjusted the file
$TOMCAT_HOME\conf\Catalina\localhost\apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA.xml to point
the solr/home to C:/home/solr-4.0-beta. With this configuration, when I
startup tomcat I got:
SEVERE: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Invalid luceneMatchVersion
'LUCENE_40', valid values are: [LUCENE_20, LUCENE_21, LUCENE_22, LUCENE_23,
LUCENE_24, LUCENE_29, LUCENE_30, LUCENE_31, LUCENE_32, LUCENE_33,
LUCENE_34, LUCENE_35, LUCENE_36, LUCENE_CURRENT ] or a string in format 'VV'
So I changed the line in solrconfig.xml:
luceneMatchVersionLUCENE_40/luceneMatchVersion
to
luceneMatchVersionLUCENE_CURRENT/luceneMatchVersion
So I got a new error:
Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
solr.NRTCachingDirectoryFactory
This class is within the file apache-solr-core-4.0.0-BETA.jar but for
some reason classloader of the class is not loaded. I then moved all jars
in $TOMCAT_HOME\webapps\apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA\WEB-INF\lib to
$TOMCAT_HOME\lib.
After this setup, I got a new error:
SEVERE: java.lang.ClassCastException:
org.apache.solr.core.NRTCachingDirectoryFactory can not be cast to
org.apache.solr.core.DirectoryFactory
So I changed the line in solrconfig.xml:
directoryFactory name=DirectoryFactory
class=${solr.directoryFactory:solr.NRTCachingDirectoryFactory}/
to
directoryFactory name=DirectoryFactory
class=${solr.directoryFactory:solr.NIOFSDirectoryFactory}/
So I got a new error:
Caused by: java.lang.ClassCastException:
org.apache.solr.spelling.DirectSolrSpellChecker can not be cast to
org.apache.solr.spelling.SolrSpellChecker
How can I resolve the problem of classloader?
How can I resolve the problem of cast of NRTCachingDirectoryFactory and
DirectSolrSpellChecker?
I can not startup the solr 4.0 beta with tomcat.
Thanks,
--
--
Karthick D S
Master's in Computer Engineering ( Software Track )
Syracuse University
Syracuse - 13210
New York
United States of America
Re: Edismax parser weird behavior
What do you get when you specify debugQuery=on (debug=query in 4.x)? In other words, what does the parsed query look like? Best Erick On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:13 AM, amitesh116 amitesh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi I am experiencing 2 strange behavior in edismax: edismax is configured to behave default OR (using mm=0) Total there are 700 results 1. Search for *auto* = *50 results* Search for *NOT auto* it gives *651 results*. Mathematically, it should give only 650 results for *NOT auto*. 2. Search for *auto* = 50 results Search for *car = 100 results* Search for *auto and car = 10 results* Since we have set mm=0, it should behave like OR and results for auto and car would be more than 100 at least Please help me, understand these two issues. Are these normal behavior? Do I need to tweak the query? Or do I need to look into config or scheam xml files. Thanks in Advance -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Edismax-parser-weird-behavior-tp4002626.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Boosting documents matching in a specific shard
I am aware that IDF is not distributed. Suppose I have to boost or give higher rank to documents which are matching in a specific/particular shard, how can I accomplish that? ** This message may contain confidential or proprietary information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above or may contain information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, disseminating, distributing or copying this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message by mistake, please immediately notify us by replying to the message and delete the original message and any copies immediately thereafter. Thank you.- ** FAFLD
Re: search is slow for URL fields of type String.
There was just a thread on this, it's may be your image_url:* try removing this clause just to test response time. If that shows a vast improvement, try adding a boolean field has_image_url, and then add a fq clause like fq=has_image_url:true Best Erick On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:35 AM, srinalluri nallurisr...@yahoo.com wrote: This is string fieldType: fieldType name=string class=solr.StrField sortMissingLast=true / These are the filelds using 'string' fieldType: field name=image_url type=string indexed=true stored=true multiValued=true / field name=url type=string indexed=true stored=true multiValued=true / And this the sample query: /select/?q=url:http\://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/08/10/social-change-coming-from-gas-prices-to-rent-prices-and-beyond/ AND image_url:* Each query like this taking around 400 milli seconds. What are the change I can do to the fieldType to improve query performance? thanks Srini -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/search-is-slow-for-URL-fields-of-type-String-tp4002662.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Solr 3.6.1: query performance is slow when asterisk is in the query
Maybe you can spoof this by using an fq clause instead? as fq=body:*? The first one will be slow, but after that it'll use the filterCache. FWIW, Erick On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:51 PM, david3s davi...@hotmail.com wrote: Ok, I'll take your suggestion, but I would still be really happy if the wildcard searches behaved a little more intelligent (body:* not looking for everything in the body). More like when you do q=*:* it doesn't really search for everything in every field. Thanks -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-3-6-1-query-performance-is-slow-when-asterisk-is-in-the-query-tp4002496p4002743.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Query regarding multi core search
Hi, How sorting is done in SOLR with multiple cores .. say 20 cores.. because in multi core search it should search in all cores then on complete results it should sort... please correct me if i am wrong. In our scenario we are executing same query on 4 cores and finally sorting the results based on one field. It works good. But i want to implement similar thing with in SOLR . can any one suggest me some code or blog regarding this? I have tried some approaches , but it takes more memory :( Thanks, Ravi -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Query-regarding-multi-core-search-tp4002847.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: search is slow for URL fields of type String.
And we should probably add a doc note with this same advice since it is an easy mistake to make. -- Jack Krupansky -Original Message- From: Erick Erickson Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 8:44 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: search is slow for URL fields of type String. There was just a thread on this, it's may be your image_url:* try removing this clause just to test response time. If that shows a vast improvement, try adding a boolean field has_image_url, and then add a fq clause like fq=has_image_url:true Best Erick On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:35 AM, srinalluri nallurisr...@yahoo.com wrote: This is string fieldType: fieldType name=string class=solr.StrField sortMissingLast=true / These are the filelds using 'string' fieldType: field name=image_url type=string indexed=true stored=true multiValued=true / field name=url type=string indexed=true stored=true multiValued=true / And this the sample query: /select/?q=url:http\://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/08/10/social-change-coming-from-gas-prices-to-rent-prices-and-beyond/ AND image_url:* Each query like this taking around 400 milli seconds. What are the change I can do to the fieldType to improve query performance? thanks Srini -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/search-is-slow-for-URL-fields-of-type-String-tp4002662.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Solr 3.6.1: query performance is slow when asterisk is in the query
You could add a default value in your field via the schema : field ... default=mynuvalue/ and then your query could be : -body:mynuvalue but I prefer the Chris's solution which is what I usually do. Ludovic. - Jouve France. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-3-6-1-query-performance-is-slow-when-asterisk-is-in-the-query-tp4002496p4002872.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Porting Lucene Index to Solr: ERROR:SCHEMA-INDEX-MISMATCH
Hello all! I already posted this question to Stackoverflow (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12027451/solr-net-query-argumentexception-in-windows-forms) but as is, either my question is too specific or just too trivial. I don't know. But maybe I'm just trying to put the cart before the horse. I have a C# Windows Forms application up and running. It uses the Lucene.Net Library with which I created a Lucen index (off of a Postgres-database). There are some articles which have more than one value, so I decided to take numeric fields into account and used them in my application as: | var valueField= new NumericField(internalname, Field.Store.YES, true); valueField.SetDoubleValue(value); doc.Add(valueField); | |I can open my Lucene index in Luke and see all those nice fields I made, so there should be no problem with the index; plus: my application searches and displays the result sets of the lucene index quite fine.| || So I thought about trying Solr and read that I could use the Lucene index at hand - I just had to edit the schema.xml file from Solr, which I did. For the numeric field variables of the Lucene index I read somewhere that I have to use TrieFields, so I updated my schema.xml as follows: |fieldType name=tdouble class=solr.TrieDoubleField precisionStep=0 omitNorms=true positionIncrementGap=0/ [...] field name=LuminaireId type=string indexed=true stored=true/ field name=LampCount type=tdouble multiValued=true indexed=true stored=true required=false/ [...] ||| For those fields, which use the numeric field I had the TrieDoubleField of Solr in mind and changed them. Firing up Solr on Tomcat and hitting it with a search query as LampCount:1 returned all the right documents. But the xml-output always says: |arr name=LampCount strERROR:SCHEMA-INDEX-MISMATCH,stringValue=1/str /arr | This could be the problem why my C# application is not running properly (using the solrnet library as the brigde between Solr instance and application) and always throws an ArgumentException when hitting my solrnet implementation with: | var results= solr.Query(LampCount:1); | But first things first: I'm not sure why there is this Index-Mismatch and how to solve it -maybe I just didn't understand the explanation of TrieFields or the port from NumericFields? Any help would be greatly appreciated. :) Greetings from Germany, Petra | |
Error java.lang.NoSuchFieldError: rsp when using jteam spatial search module
Hi guys, i'm getting an error when using the GeoDistance component from jteam
(http://info.orange11.nl ) when fireing a query with a spatial tag:
error:
~~~
SEVERE: java.lang.NoSuchFieldError: rsp
at
nl.jteam.search.solrext.spatial.GeoDistanceComponent.process(GeoDistanceComponent.java:64)
at
org.apache.solr.handler.component.SearchHandler.handleRequestBody(SearchHandler.java:186)
at
org.apache.solr.handler.RequestHandlerBase.handleRequest(RequestHandlerBase.java:129)
at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.execute(SolrCore.java:1376)
[...]
(for full stacktrace see http://pastebin.com/rqMYZDb5)
solrconfig.xml:
~
searchComponent name=geoDistance
class=nl.jteam.search.solrext.spatial.GeoDistanceComponent
str name=latFieldlat/str
str name=lngFieldlng/str
/searchComponent
As it seems, the GeoDistance component is loaded correctly and its process
method is called, but the passed ResponseBuilder object is missing the rsp
field. According the ResponseBuilder.java source, the rsp-member is
definied, so i'm wondering what the heck is going on here...(i'm not very
experienced with java, i thougth that either the passes param is of wrong
type or it should have the members definied in the class...)
I googled and found some other dudes with the same problem, but i didn't
found the solution for this.
Solr 3.6.1, jteam spatial module 2.0RC4, GeoDistance process-method:
public class GeoDistanceComponent extends SearchComponent {
[...]
public void process(ResponseBuilder responseBuilder) throws IOException {
[...]
MapSolrDocument, Integer idsByDocument = new HashMapSolrDocument,
Integer();
SolrDocumentList documentList = SolrUtil.docListToSolrDocumentList(
responseBuilder.getResults().docList,
responseBuilder.req.getSearcher(),
responseBuilder.rsp.getReturnFields(),
idsByDocument);
this is the line that produces the error. I get the same error on tomcat7
and jetty.
Can anyone help / give a hint? If you need more information let me know.
Cheers :)
leber
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Error-java-lang-NoSuchFieldError-rsp-when-using-jteam-spatial-search-module-tp4002884.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Solr4 BETA group.ngroups count
Hello, I have a problem using grouped queries and the 'group.ngroups' parameter. When I run the following request myURL/select?q=myQuerygroup=truegroup.field=personIdgroup.ngroups=truewt=xml the response looks like this: lst name=grouped lst name=personId int name=matches11/int int name=ngroups6/int arr name=groups lst str name=groupValue106.12345/str result name=doclist numFound=3 start=0.../result /lst lst str name=groupValue106.12312/str result name=doclist numFound=3 start=0.../result /lst lst str name=groupValue101.12313/str result name=doclist numFound=2 start=0 maxScore= 0.08318384.../result /lst lst str name=groupValue101.12312/str result name=doclist numFound=3 start=0 maxScore= 0.08318384.../result /lst /arr /lst /lst I expected, that the ngroups results in 4, because it is the total count of all groups, that match my query. The result of 'matches' is right, and the 11 docs are distributed on the 4 groups of my response, but I have no idea, what ngroups is counting in this case. Can anybody explain to me, what's the meaning of ngroups is? regards Norman Lenzner
Re: The way to customize ranking?
Hi You might add an int field Search Rule that identifies the type of search. example Search Rule Description 0 Unpaid Search 1 Paid Search - Rule 1 2 Paid Serch - Rule 2 You can use filterqueries (http://wiki.apache.org/solr/CommonQueryParameters) like fq: Search Rule :[1 TO *] Alternatively, You can even use a boolean field to identify whether or not a search is paid and then an addtitional field that identifies the type of paid search. -- karthick On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Nicholas Ding nicholas...@gmail.comwrote: Hi I'm working on Solr to build a local business search in China. We have a special requirement from advertiser. When user makes a search, if the results contain paid advertisements, those ads need to be moved on the top of results. For different ads, they have detailed rules about which comes first. Could anyone offer me some suggestions how I customize the ranking based on my requirement? Thanks Nicholas
Re: The way to customize ranking?
Thank you, but I don't want to filter those ads. For example, when user make a search like q=Car Result list: 1. Ford Automobile (score 10) 2. Honda Civic (score 9) ... ... ... 99. Paid Ads (score 1, Ad has own field to identify it's an Ad) What I want to find is a way to make the score of Paid Ads higher than Ford Automobile. Basically, the result structure will look like - [Paid Ads Section] [Most valuable Ads 1] [Most valuable Ads 2] [Less valuable Ads 1] [Less valuable Ads 2] - [Relevant Results Section] On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Karthick Duraisamy Soundararaj karthick.soundara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi You might add an int field Search Rule that identifies the type of search. example Search Rule Description 0 Unpaid Search 1 Paid Search - Rule 1 2 Paid Serch - Rule 2 You can use filterqueries ( http://wiki.apache.org/solr/CommonQueryParameters) like fq: Search Rule :[1 TO *] Alternatively, You can even use a boolean field to identify whether or not a search is paid and then an addtitional field that identifies the type of paid search. -- karthick On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Nicholas Ding nicholas...@gmail.com wrote: Hi I'm working on Solr to build a local business search in China. We have a special requirement from advertiser. When user makes a search, if the results contain paid advertisements, those ads need to be moved on the top of results. For different ads, they have detailed rules about which comes first. Could anyone offer me some suggestions how I customize the ranking based on my requirement? Thanks Nicholas
Re: search is slow for URL fields of type String.
Also note, emphasizing what Erick said below, that with this type of has a value in field type clause, it works fine as an fq as that gets cached so you only take the performance hit once on it. Generally this is a clause that is reused so be sure to peel it off as an fq rather than AND'ing it to a q(uery) parameter. The advice to make a separate has_fieldname field (or field_size) is the best advice, but when dealing with low cardinality fields it's not really an issue to use something like category:* where there are only a handful of category values in use. Erik On Aug 23, 2012, at 08:51 , Jack Krupansky wrote: And we should probably add a doc note with this same advice since it is an easy mistake to make. -- Jack Krupansky -Original Message- From: Erick Erickson Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 8:44 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: search is slow for URL fields of type String. There was just a thread on this, it's may be your image_url:* try removing this clause just to test response time. If that shows a vast improvement, try adding a boolean field has_image_url, and then add a fq clause like fq=has_image_url:true Best Erick On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:35 AM, srinalluri nallurisr...@yahoo.com wrote: This is string fieldType: fieldType name=string class=solr.StrField sortMissingLast=true / These are the filelds using 'string' fieldType: field name=image_url type=string indexed=true stored=true multiValued=true / field name=url type=string indexed=true stored=true multiValued=true / And this the sample query: /select/?q=url:http\://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/08/10/social-change-coming-from-gas-prices-to-rent-prices-and-beyond/ AND image_url:* Each query like this taking around 400 milli seconds. What are the change I can do to the fieldType to improve query performance? thanks Srini -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/search-is-slow-for-URL-fields-of-type-String-tp4002662.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: Cloud assigning incorrect port to shards
I am using the jetty container from the example. The only thing I have done is change the schema to match up my documents rather than the example -Original Message- From: Mark Miller [mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 5:50 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Cloud assigning incorrect port to shards What container are you using? Sent from my iPhone On Aug 22, 2012, at 3:14 PM, Buttler, David buttl...@llnl.gov wrote: Hi, I have set up a Solr 4 beta cloud cluster. I have uploaded a config directory, and linked it with a configuration name. I have started two solr on two computers and added a couple of shards using the Core Admin function on the admin page. When I go to the admin cloud view, the shards all have the computer name and port attached to them. BUT, the port is the default port (8983), and not the port that I assigned on the command line. I can still connect to the correct port, and not the reported port. I anticipate that this will lead to errors when I get to doing distributed query, as zookeeper seems to be collecting incorrect information. Any thoughts as to why the incorrect port is being stored in zookeeper? Thanks, Dave
Data Import Handler - Could not load driver - com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver - SOLR 4 Beta
Hello, I was able to get the DIH working in SOLR 3.6.1 (placed the sqljdbc4.jar file in the lib directory, etc). Everything worked great. Tried to get everything working in SOLR 4 beta (on the same dev machine connecting to same db, etc) and was unable to due to the sql driver not loading. What i've done: 1. SOLR 4 admin comes up fine(configured solrconfig.xml and schema.xml) 2. Dropped the sqljdbc4.jar in the lib directory 3. Added sqljdbc4.jar to classpath 4. Added dataimporthandler to solrconfig.xml: lib dir=../../../dist/ regex=apache-solr-dataimporthandler-\d.*\.jar / lib dir=../../../contrib/dataimporthandler/lib/ regex=.*\.jar / 5. Even tried jtds which also gave me errors that the driver could not be loaded. Here is my datasource in the data-config.xml (DIH config file): dataSource name=db type=JdbcDataSource driver=com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver url=jdbc:sqlserver://DBSERVERNAME;instanceName=INST1;user=solr;password=password;applicationName=solr-DIH;databaseName=scratch user=solr password=password/ Here is the error i get when trying to use jdbc connector: SEVERE: Full Import failed:java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImportHandlerException: Could not load driver: com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver Processing Document # 1 at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DocBuilder.execute(DocBuilder.java:273) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImporter.doFullImport(DataImporter.java:382) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImporter.runCmd(DataImporter.java:448) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImporter$1.run(DataImporter.java:429) Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImportHandlerException: Could not load driver: com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver Processing Document # 1 at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DocBuilder.buildDocument(DocBuilder.java:413) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DocBuilder.doFullDump(DocBuilder.java:326) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DocBuilder.execute(DocBuilder.java:234) ... 3 more Caused by: org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImportHandlerException: Could not load driver: com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver Processing Document # 1 at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImportHandlerException.wrapAndThrow(DataImportHandlerException.java:71) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.JdbcDataSource.createConnectionFactory(JdbcDataSource.java:114) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.JdbcDataSource.init(JdbcDataSource.java:62) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImporter.getDataSourceInstance(DataImporter.java:354) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.ContextImpl.getDataSource(ContextImpl.java:99) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.SqlEntityProcessor.init(SqlEntityProcessor.java:53) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.EntityProcessorWrapper.init(EntityProcessorWrapper.java:74) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DocBuilder.buildDocument(DocBuilder.java:430) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DocBuilder.buildDocument(DocBuilder.java:411) ... 5 more Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: Unable to load com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver or org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DocBuilder.loadClass(DocBuilder.java:899) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.JdbcDataSource.createConnectionFactory(JdbcDataSource.java:112) ... 12 more Caused by: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Error loading class 'com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver' at org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader.findClass(SolrResourceLoader.java:438) at org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DocBuilder.loadClass(DocBuilder.java:889) ... 13 more Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source) at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(Unknown Source) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source) at java.net.FactoryURLClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source) at java.lang.Class.forName0(Native Method) at java.lang.Class.forName(Unknown Source) at org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader.findClass(SolrResourceLoader.java:422) ... 14 more -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Data-Import-Handler-Could-not-load-driver-com-microsoft-sqlserver-jdbc-SQLServerDriver-SOLR-4-Beta-tp4002902.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Error java.lang.NoSuchFieldError: rsp when using jteam spatial search module
...FYI: works fine with 3.6.0 -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Error-java-lang-NoSuchFieldError-rsp-when-using-jteam-spatial-search-module-tp4002884p4002904.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Solr 4.0 beta : Is collection1 hard coded somewhere?
I removed the string collection1 from my solr.xml file in solr home and
modified my solr.xml file as follows:
cores adminPath=/admin/cores defaultCoreName=foobar1 host=${host:}
hostPort=${jetty.port:} zkClientTimeout=${zkClientTimeout:15000}
core name=foobarcorename instanceDir=. /
/cores
Then I restarted Solr.
However, I keep getting messages about
Can't find resource 'solrconfig.xml' in classpath or
'/l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/1/collection1/conf/'
And the log messages show that Solr is trying to create the collection1
instance
Aug 23, 2012 12:06:02 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer create
INFO: Creating SolrCore 'collection1' using instanceDir:
/l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/3/collection1
Aug 23, 2012 12:06:02 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader init
I think somehow the previous solr.xml configuration is being stored on disk
somewhere and loaded.
Any clues?
Tom
Re: need help understanding an issue with scoring
update:
as an experiment - i changed the query to a wildcard (9030*) instead of an
explicit value (9030)
example:
QUERY=http://$SERVER.intra.searshc.com:${PORT}/solrpartscat/core1/select?qt=itemNoProductTypeBrandSearchq=9030*rows=2000debugQuery=onfl=*,score;
this resulted in a results list that appears much more rational from a sort
order perspective -
however - the wildcard query is not acceptable from a performance stand
point.
any input or illumination would be appreciated ;)
thank you
itemNo, score, rankNo, partCnt
[9030],1.0,10353,1
[90302 ],1.0,6849,1
[9030P ],1.0,444,1
[903093 ],1.0,51,1
[9030430 ],1.0,47,1
[9030],1.0,37,1
[903057-9010 ],1.0,26,1
[903061-9010 ],1.0,20,1
[903046-9010 ],1.0,18,1
[903056-9010 ],1.0,14,1
[903095 ],1.0,14,1
[90303-MR1-000 ],1.0,14,1
[903097-9050 ],1.0,12,1
[903046-9011 ],1.0,12,1
[903097-9010 ],1.0,11,1
[903097-9040 ],1.0,11,1
[903063-9100 ],1.0,6,1
[903066-9011 ],1.0,6,1
[903098 ],1.0,3,1
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/need-help-understanding-an-issue-with-scoring-tp4002897p4002919.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: need help understanding an issue with scoring
looks like the original complete list of the results did not get attached to this thread here is a snippet of the list. what i am trying to demonstrate, is the difference in scoring and ultimately, sorting - and the breadth of documents (a few hundred) between the two documents of interest (9030 and 90302) thank you, itemNo, score, rankNo, partCnt [9030],12.014701,10353,1 [9030],12.014701,37,1 [9030],12.014701,1,1 [9030 ],12.014701,0,167 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [9030],12.014701,0,1 [PC-9030],7.509188,0,169 [58-9030 ],7.509188,0,1 [9030-1R ],7.509188,0,1 [903028-9030 ],7.509188,0,1 [903139-9030 ],7.509188,0,1 [903091-9030 ],7.509188,0,1 [903099-9030 ],7.509188,0,1 [903153-9030 ],7.509188,0,1 [031-9030],7.509188,0,1 [308-9030],7.509188,0,1 [9030-6010 ],7.509188,0,1 [9030-6010 ],7.509188,0,1 [9030-6006 ],7.509188,0,1 [9030-6008 ],7.509188,0,1 [9030-6008 ],7.509188,0,1 [9030-6001 ],7.509188,0,1 [9030-6003 ],7.509188,0,1 [9030-6006 ],7.509188,0,1 [208568-9030 ],7.509188,0,1 [79-9030 ],7.509188,0,1 [33-9030 ],7.509188,0,1 [M-9030 ],7.509188,0,1 ... a few hundred more ... [LGQ9030PQ1 ],0.41475832,0,150 [LEQ9030PQ0 ],0.41475832,0,124 [LEQ9030PQ1 ],0.41475832,0,123 [CWE9030BCE ],0.41475832,0,115 [PJDS9030Z ],0.29327843,0,1 [8A-CT9-030-010 ],0.29327843,0,1 [RDT9030A],0.29327843,0,1 [PJDG9030Z ],0.29327843,0,1 [90302 ],0.20737916,6849,1 ~ -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/need-help-understanding-an-issue-with-scoring-tp4002897p4002922.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Solr 4.0 beta : Is collection1 hard coded somewhere?
I did not describe the problems correctly. I have 3 solr shards with solr homes .../solrs/4.0/1 .../solrs/4.0/2 and .../solrs/4.0/2solrs/3 For shard 1 I have a solr.xml file with the modifications described in the previous message. For that instance, it appears that the problem is that the semantics of specifing the instancedir have changed between 3.6 and 4.0. I specified the instancedir as instanceDir=. However, I get this error in the log: Cannot create directory: /l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/1/./data/index Note that instead of using Solr home /l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/1 (what I would expect for the relative path .), that Solr appears to be appending . to Solr home. The solr.xml file says that paths are relative to the installation directory. Perhaps that needs to be clarified in the file. For shards 2 and 3, I tried not using a solr.xml file and I did not create a collection1 subdirectory. For these solr instances, I got the messages about collection1 and files not being found in the $SOLRHOME/collection1 path Can't find resource 'solrconfig.xml' in classpath or '/l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/3/collection1/conf/', cwd=/l/local/apache-tomcat-dev Looking at the logs it appears that collection1 is specified as the default core somewhere: Aug 23, 2012 12:42:47 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer$Initializer initialize INFO: looking for solr.xml: /l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/3/solr.xml Aug 23, 2012 12:42:47 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer init INFO: New CoreContainer 1281149250 Aug 23, 2012 12:42:47 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer$Initializer initialize INFO: no solr.xml file found - using default Aug 23, 2012 12:42:47 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer load INFO: Loading CoreContainer using Solr Home: '/l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/3/' Aug 23, 2012 12:42:47 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader init INFO: Creating SolrCore 'collection1' using instanceDir: /l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/3/collection1 Is this default of collection1 specified in some other config file or hardcoded into Solr somewhere? If using a core is mandatory with Solr 4.0 , the CoreAdmin wiki page and the release notes should point this out. Tom
Re: The way to customize ranking?
I cant think of a way you can achieve this in one request. Can you make two different solr requests? If so, you can make on with fq=PaidSearch:0 other with fq=padidSearch:[1:*] . On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Nicholas Ding nicholas...@gmail.comwrote: Thank you, but I don't want to filter those ads. For example, when user make a search like q=Car Result list: 1. Ford Automobile (score 10) 2. Honda Civic (score 9) ... ... ... 99. Paid Ads (score 1, Ad has own field to identify it's an Ad) What I want to find is a way to make the score of Paid Ads higher than Ford Automobile. Basically, the result structure will look like - [Paid Ads Section] [Most valuable Ads 1] [Most valuable Ads 2] [Less valuable Ads 1] [Less valuable Ads 2] - [Relevant Results Section] On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Karthick Duraisamy Soundararaj karthick.soundara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi You might add an int field Search Rule that identifies the type of search. example Search Rule Description 0 Unpaid Search 1 Paid Search - Rule 1 2 Paid Serch - Rule 2 You can use filterqueries ( http://wiki.apache.org/solr/CommonQueryParameters) like fq: Search Rule :[1 TO *] Alternatively, You can even use a boolean field to identify whether or not a search is paid and then an addtitional field that identifies the type of paid search. -- karthick On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Nicholas Ding nicholas...@gmail.com wrote: Hi I'm working on Solr to build a local business search in China. We have a special requirement from advertiser. When user makes a search, if the results contain paid advertisements, those ads need to be moved on the top of results. For different ads, they have detailed rules about which comes first. Could anyone offer me some suggestions how I customize the ranking based on my requirement? Thanks Nicholas
RES: Problem to start solr-4.0.0-BETA with tomcat-6.0.20
I made this instalation on a new tomcat.
With Solr 3.4.*, 3.5.*, 3.6.* works with jars into
$TOMCAT_HOME/webapps/solr/WEB-INF/lib, but with solr 4.0 beta doesn´t work. I
needed to add the jars into $TOMCAT_HOME/lib.
The problem with the cast seems to be in the source code.
-Mensagem original-
De: Karthick Duraisamy Soundararaj [mailto:karthick.soundara...@gmail.com]
Enviada em: quinta-feira, 23 de agosto de 2012 09:22
Para: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Assunto: Re: Problem to start solr-4.0.0-BETA with tomcat-6.0.20
Not sure if this can help. But once I had a similar problem with Solr 3.6.0
where tomcat refused to find one of the classes that existed. I deleted the
tomcat's webapp directory and then it worked fine.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.comwrote:
First, I'm no Tomcat expert here's the Tomcat Solr page, but
you've probably already seen it:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrTomcat
But I'm guessing that you may have old jars around somewhere and
things are getting confused. I'd blow away the whole thing and start
over, whenever I start copying jars around I always lose track of
what's where.
Have you successfully had any other Solr operate under Tomcat?
Sorry I can't be more help
Erick
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Claudio Ranieri
claudio.rani...@estadao.com wrote:
Hi,
I tried to start the solr-4.0.0-BETA with tomcat-6.0.20 but does not
work.
I copied the apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA.war to $TOMCAT_HOME/webapps.
Then I
copied the directory apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA\example\solr to
C:\home\solr-4.0-beta and adjusted the file
$TOMCAT_HOME\conf\Catalina\localhost\apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA.xml to
point the solr/home to C:/home/solr-4.0-beta. With this configuration,
when I startup tomcat I got:
SEVERE: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Invalid
luceneMatchVersion
'LUCENE_40', valid values are: [LUCENE_20, LUCENE_21, LUCENE_22,
LUCENE_23, LUCENE_24, LUCENE_29, LUCENE_30, LUCENE_31, LUCENE_32,
LUCENE_33, LUCENE_34, LUCENE_35, LUCENE_36, LUCENE_CURRENT ] or a string in
format 'VV'
So I changed the line in solrconfig.xml:
luceneMatchVersionLUCENE_40/luceneMatchVersion
to
luceneMatchVersionLUCENE_CURRENT/luceneMatchVersion
So I got a new error:
Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
solr.NRTCachingDirectoryFactory
This class is within the file apache-solr-core-4.0.0-BETA.jar but
for
some reason classloader of the class is not loaded. I then moved all
jars in $TOMCAT_HOME\webapps\apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA\WEB-INF\lib to
$TOMCAT_HOME\lib.
After this setup, I got a new error:
SEVERE: java.lang.ClassCastException:
org.apache.solr.core.NRTCachingDirectoryFactory can not be cast to
org.apache.solr.core.DirectoryFactory
So I changed the line in solrconfig.xml:
directoryFactory name=DirectoryFactory
class=${solr.directoryFactory:solr.NRTCachingDirectoryFactory}/
to
directoryFactory name=DirectoryFactory
class=${solr.directoryFactory:solr.NIOFSDirectoryFactory}/
So I got a new error:
Caused by: java.lang.ClassCastException:
org.apache.solr.spelling.DirectSolrSpellChecker can not be cast to
org.apache.solr.spelling.SolrSpellChecker
How can I resolve the problem of classloader?
How can I resolve the problem of cast of NRTCachingDirectoryFactory
and
DirectSolrSpellChecker?
I can not startup the solr 4.0 beta with tomcat.
Thanks,
--
--
Karthick D S
Master's in Computer Engineering ( Software Track ) Syracuse University
Syracuse - 13210 New York United States of America
Re: Solr 4.0 beta : Is collection1 hard coded somewhere?
The answer is yes. collection1 is defined as the default core name in CoreContainer.java on line 94 or so. I have opened a jira issue for this and other issues related to the documentation of solr.xml and Solr core configuration issues for Solr 4.0 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3753 On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Tom Burton-West tburt...@umich.edu wrote: I did not describe the problems correctly. I have 3 solr shards with solr homes .../solrs/4.0/1 .../solrs/4.0/2 and .../solrs/4.0/2solrs/3 For shard 1 I have a solr.xml file with the modifications described in the previous message. For that instance, it appears that the problem is that the semantics of specifing the instancedir have changed between 3.6 and 4.0. I specified the instancedir as instanceDir=. However, I get this error in the log: Cannot create directory: /l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/1/./data/index Note that instead of using Solr home /l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/1 (what I would expect for the relative path .), that Solr appears to be appending . to Solr home. The solr.xml file says that paths are relative to the installation directory. Perhaps that needs to be clarified in the file. For shards 2 and 3, I tried not using a solr.xml file and I did not create a collection1 subdirectory. For these solr instances, I got the messages about collection1 and files not being found in the $SOLRHOME/collection1 path Can't find resource 'solrconfig.xml' in classpath or '/l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/3/collection1/conf/', cwd=/l/local/apache-tomcat-dev Looking at the logs it appears that collection1 is specified as the default core somewhere: Aug 23, 2012 12:42:47 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer$Initializer initialize INFO: looking for solr.xml: /l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/3/solr.xml Aug 23, 2012 12:42:47 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer init INFO: New CoreContainer 1281149250 Aug 23, 2012 12:42:47 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer$Initializer initialize INFO: no solr.xml file found - using default Aug 23, 2012 12:42:47 PM org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer load INFO: Loading CoreContainer using Solr Home: '/l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/3/' Aug 23, 2012 12:42:47 PM org.apache.solr.core.SolrResourceLoader init INFO: Creating SolrCore 'collection1' using instanceDir: /l/solrs/dev/solrs/4.0/3/collection1 Is this default of collection1 specified in some other config file or hardcoded into Solr somewhere? If using a core is mandatory with Solr 4.0 , the CoreAdmin wiki page and the release notes should point this out. Tom
Re: Scalability of Solr Result Grouping/Field Collapsing: Millions/Billions of documents?
Tom, Feel free to find my benchmark results for two alternative joining approaches. http://blog.griddynamics.com/2012/08/block-join-query-performs.html Regards On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.comwrote: Tom: I thin my comments were that grouping on a field where there was a unique value _per document_ chewed up a lot of resources. Conceptually, there's a bucket for each unique group value. And grouping on a file path is just asking for trouble. But the memory used for grouping should max as a function of the unique values in the grouped field. Best Erick On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, distributed grouping works, but grouping takes a lot of resources. If you can avoid in distributed mode, so much the better. On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Tom Burton-West tburt...@umich.edu wrote: Thanks Tirthankar, So the issue in memory use for sorting. I'm not sure I understand how sorting of grouping fields is involved with the defaults and field collapsing, since the default sorts by relevance not grouping field. On the other hand I don't know much about how field collapsing is implemented. So far the few tests I've made haven't revealed any memory problems. We are using very small string fields for grouping and I think that we probably only have a couple of cases where we are grouping more than a few thousand docs. I will try to find a query with a lot of docs per group and take a look at the memory use using JConsole. Tom On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Tirthankar Chatterjee tchatter...@commvault.com wrote: Hi Tom, We had an issue where we are keeping millions of docs in a single node and we were trying to group them on a string field which is nothing but full file path… that caused SOLR to go out of memory… ** ** Erick has explained nicely in the thread as to why it won’t work and I had to find another way of architecting it. ** ** How do you think this is different in your case. If you want to group by a string field with thousands of similar entries I am guessing you will face the same issue. ** ** Thanks, Tirthankar ***Legal Disclaimer*** This communication may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any unauthorized review, use or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply email and delete the message. Thank you. ** -- Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com -- Sincerely yours Mikhail Khludnev Tech Lead Grid Dynamics http://www.griddynamics.com mkhlud...@griddynamics.com
Re: Holy cow do I love 4.0's admin screen
Andy, we are not running solr 4.0 here in production. can you elaborate on your comment related to your polling script written in ruby and how the new data import status screen makes your polling app obsolete? i wrote my own polling app (in shell) to work around the very same issues: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/possible-status-codes-from-solr-during-a-DIH-data-import-process-td3987110.html thx for the post -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Holy-cow-do-I-love-4-0-s-admin-screen-tp4002912p4002936.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Holy cow do I love 4.0's admin screen
can you elaborate on your comment related to your polling script written in ruby and how the new data import status screen makes your polling app obsolete? The 4.0 admin tools have a screen that give the status in the web app so I don't have to run the CLI tool to check the indexing status. However, it will still be necessary if I need to wait for indexing to complete in, for example, a Makefile or a script. xoxo Andy -- Andy Lester = a...@petdance.com = www.petdance.com = AIM:petdance
using tie parameter of edismax to raise a score (disjunction max query)?
Hello all, this more specific question is related to my earlier post at: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/need-help-understanding-an-issue-with-scoring-td4002897.html i am reading here about the tie parameter: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/ExtendedDisMax?highlight=%28edismax%29#tie_.28Tie_breaker.29 *can i use the edismax, tie= parameter, to raise the following score?* my goal is to raise the total score of this document (see score snippet below) to 9.11329. to do this - would i use tie=0.0 to make a pure disjunction max query -- only the maximum scoring sub query contributes to the final score? str name=90302 ,0046,046 *0.20737723* = (MATCH) max of: 0.20737723 = (MATCH) weight(itemNo:9030^0.9 in 1796597), product of: 0.022755474 = queryWeight(itemNo:9030^0.9), product of: 0.9 = boost 9.11329 = idf(docFreq=2565, maxDocs=8566704) 0.0027743944 = queryNorm *9.11329* = (MATCH) fieldWeight(itemNo:9030 in 1796597), product of: 1.0 = tf(termFreq(itemNo:9030)=1) 9.11329 = idf(docFreq=2565, maxDocs=8566704) 1.0 = fieldNorm(field=itemNo, doc=1796597) /str thank you -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/using-tie-parameter-of-edismax-to-raise-a-score-disjunction-max-query-tp4002935.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
need help understanding an issue with scoring
hello, i am trying to understand the debug output from a query, and specifically - how scores for two (2) documents are derived and why they are so far apart. the user is entering 9030 for the search the search is rightfully returning the top document, however - the question is why is the document with id 90302 so far down on the list. i have attached a text file i generated with xslt, pulling the document information. the text file has the itemNo, the rankNo and the partCnt. the sort order of the response handler is: str name=sortscore desc, rankNo desc, partCnt desc/str if you look at the text file - you will see that 90302 is 174'th on the list! 90302 has a rankNo of 6849 - and i would think that would drive it much higher on the list and therefore much closer to 9030. what is happening from a business perspective - is - 9030 is one of our top selling parts as is 90302. they need to be closer together in the results instead of separated by 170+ documents that have a rankNo of 0. i have also CnP the response handler that is being used - below can someone help me understand the scoring so i can correct this? this is the scoring for the two documents: str name=9030,0046,046 12.014634 = (MATCH) max of: 0.20737723 = (MATCH) weight(itemNo:9030^0.9 in 2308681), product of: 0.022755474 = queryWeight(itemNo:9030^0.9), product of: 0.9 = boost 9.11329 = idf(docFreq=2565, maxDocs=8566704) 0.0027743944 = queryNorm 9.11329 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(itemNo:9030 in 2308681), product of: 1.0 = tf(termFreq(itemNo:9030)=1) 9.11329 = idf(docFreq=2565, maxDocs=8566704) 1.0 = fieldNorm(field=itemNo, doc=2308681) 12.014634 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(itemNoExactMatchStr:9030 in 2308681), product of: 1.0 = tf(termFreq(itemNoExactMatchStr:9030)=1) 12.014634 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=8566704) 1.0 = fieldNorm(field=itemNoExactMatchStr, doc=2308681) /str str name=90302 ,0046,046 0.20737723 = (MATCH) max of: 0.20737723 = (MATCH) weight(itemNo:9030^0.9 in 1796597), product of: 0.022755474 = queryWeight(itemNo:9030^0.9), product of: 0.9 = boost 9.11329 = idf(docFreq=2565, maxDocs=8566704) 0.0027743944 = queryNorm 9.11329 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(itemNo:9030 in 1796597), product of: 1.0 = tf(termFreq(itemNo:9030)=1) 9.11329 = idf(docFreq=2565, maxDocs=8566704) 1.0 = fieldNorm(field=itemNo, doc=1796597) /str ~ requestHandler name=itemNoProductTypeBrandSearch class=solr.SearchHandler default=false lst name=defaults str name=defTypeedismax/str str name=echoParamsall/str int name=rows10/int str name=qfitemNoExactMatchStr^30 itemNo^.9 divProductTypeDesc^.8 brand^.5/str str name=q.alt*:*/str str name=sortscore desc, rankNo desc, partCnt desc/str str name=facettrue/str str name=facet.fielditemDescFacet/str str name=facet.fieldbrandFacet/str str name=facet.fielddivProductTypeIdFacet/str /lst lst name=appends /lst lst name=invariants /lst /requestHandler thank you for any help -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/need-help-understanding-an-issue-with-scoring-tp4002897.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: The way to customize ranking?
I would create two indices, one with your content and one with your ads. This approach would allow you to precisely control how many ads you pull back and how you merge them into the results, and you would be able to control schemas, boosting, defaults fields, etc for each index independently. Best regards François On Aug 23, 2012, at 11:45 AM, Nicholas Ding nicholas...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you, but I don't want to filter those ads. For example, when user make a search like q=Car Result list: 1. Ford Automobile (score 10) 2. Honda Civic (score 9) ... ... ... 99. Paid Ads (score 1, Ad has own field to identify it's an Ad) What I want to find is a way to make the score of Paid Ads higher than Ford Automobile. Basically, the result structure will look like - [Paid Ads Section] [Most valuable Ads 1] [Most valuable Ads 2] [Less valuable Ads 1] [Less valuable Ads 2] - [Relevant Results Section] On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Karthick Duraisamy Soundararaj karthick.soundara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi You might add an int field Search Rule that identifies the type of search. example Search Rule Description 0 Unpaid Search 1 Paid Search - Rule 1 2 Paid Serch - Rule 2 You can use filterqueries ( http://wiki.apache.org/solr/CommonQueryParameters) like fq: Search Rule :[1 TO *] Alternatively, You can even use a boolean field to identify whether or not a search is paid and then an addtitional field that identifies the type of paid search. -- karthick On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Nicholas Ding nicholas...@gmail.com wrote: Hi I'm working on Solr to build a local business search in China. We have a special requirement from advertiser. When user makes a search, if the results contain paid advertisements, those ads need to be moved on the top of results. For different ads, they have detailed rules about which comes first. Could anyone offer me some suggestions how I customize the ranking based on my requirement? Thanks Nicholas
Re: need help understanding an issue with scoring
What is your query and qf? The first doc gets its high score due to a match on the itemNoExactMatchStr field which the second doc doesn't have: 12.014634 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(itemNoExactMatchStr:9030 in 2308681), With a low document frequency (inverts to high inverse document frequency): 12.014634 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=8566704) -- Jack Krupansky -Original Message- From: geeky2 Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 11:44 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: need help understanding an issue with scoring hello, i am trying to understand the debug output from a query, and specifically - how scores for two (2) documents are derived and why they are so far apart. the user is entering 9030 for the search the search is rightfully returning the top document, however - the question is why is the document with id 90302 so far down on the list. i have attached a text file i generated with xslt, pulling the document information. the text file has the itemNo, the rankNo and the partCnt. the sort order of the response handler is: str name=sortscore desc, rankNo desc, partCnt desc/str if you look at the text file - you will see that 90302 is 174'th on the list! 90302 has a rankNo of 6849 - and i would think that would drive it much higher on the list and therefore much closer to 9030. what is happening from a business perspective - is - 9030 is one of our top selling parts as is 90302. they need to be closer together in the results instead of separated by 170+ documents that have a rankNo of 0. i have also CnP the response handler that is being used - below can someone help me understand the scoring so i can correct this? this is the scoring for the two documents: str name=9030,0046,046 12.014634 = (MATCH) max of: 0.20737723 = (MATCH) weight(itemNo:9030^0.9 in 2308681), product of: 0.022755474 = queryWeight(itemNo:9030^0.9), product of: 0.9 = boost 9.11329 = idf(docFreq=2565, maxDocs=8566704) 0.0027743944 = queryNorm 9.11329 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(itemNo:9030 in 2308681), product of: 1.0 = tf(termFreq(itemNo:9030)=1) 9.11329 = idf(docFreq=2565, maxDocs=8566704) 1.0 = fieldNorm(field=itemNo, doc=2308681) 12.014634 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(itemNoExactMatchStr:9030 in 2308681), product of: 1.0 = tf(termFreq(itemNoExactMatchStr:9030)=1) 12.014634 = idf(docFreq=140, maxDocs=8566704) 1.0 = fieldNorm(field=itemNoExactMatchStr, doc=2308681) /str str name=90302 ,0046,046 0.20737723 = (MATCH) max of: 0.20737723 = (MATCH) weight(itemNo:9030^0.9 in 1796597), product of: 0.022755474 = queryWeight(itemNo:9030^0.9), product of: 0.9 = boost 9.11329 = idf(docFreq=2565, maxDocs=8566704) 0.0027743944 = queryNorm 9.11329 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(itemNo:9030 in 1796597), product of: 1.0 = tf(termFreq(itemNo:9030)=1) 9.11329 = idf(docFreq=2565, maxDocs=8566704) 1.0 = fieldNorm(field=itemNo, doc=1796597) /str ~ requestHandler name=itemNoProductTypeBrandSearch class=solr.SearchHandler default=false lst name=defaults str name=defTypeedismax/str str name=echoParamsall/str int name=rows10/int str name=qfitemNoExactMatchStr^30 itemNo^.9 divProductTypeDesc^.8 brand^.5/str str name=q.alt*:*/str str name=sortscore desc, rankNo desc, partCnt desc/str str name=facettrue/str str name=facet.fielditemDescFacet/str str name=facet.fieldbrandFacet/str str name=facet.fielddivProductTypeIdFacet/str /lst lst name=appends /lst lst name=invariants /lst /requestHandler thank you for any help -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/need-help-understanding-an-issue-with-scoring-tp4002897.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Bitmap field in solr
On Aug 23, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Rohit Harchandani wrote: Hi all, Is there any way to have a bitmap field in Solr?? I have a use case where I need to search specific attributes of a document. Rather than having an is_A, is_B, is_C (all related to each other)etc...how would i store all this data in a single field and still be able to query it?? Can it be done in any way apart from storing them as strings in a text field? You can have a field that is multiValued. It still needs a base type, like string or int. For instance, in my book database, I have a field called classifications and it is multivalued. field name=classifications type=string multiValued=true / A classification of 1 means spiralbound, and 2 means large print and 3 means multilingual and so on. So if my user wants to search for a multilingual book, I search for classifications:3. If you want spiralbound large print, you'd search for classifications:1 classifications:2. xoa -- Andy Lester = a...@petdance.com = www.petdance.com = AIM:petdance
Re: need help understanding an issue with scoring
hello,
this is the query i am using:
cat goquery.sh
#!/bin/bash
SERVER=$1
PORT=$2
QUERY=http://$SERVER.blah.blah.com:${PORT}/solrpartscat/core1/select?qt=itemNoProductTypeBrandSearchq=9030rows=2000debugQuery=onfl=*,score;
curl -v $QUERY
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/need-help-understanding-an-issue-with-scoring-tp4002897p4002969.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
recommended SSD
Hi Is there a SSD brand and spec that the community recommends for an index of size 56G with mostly reads? We are evaluating this one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227706 thank you Peyman
Re: The way to customize ranking?
Could you not apply this logic in your solr client prior to displaying the results? On 23 August 2012 20:56, François Schiettecatte fschietteca...@gmail.com wrote: I would create two indices, one with your content and one with your ads. This approach would allow you to precisely control how many ads you pull back and how you merge them into the results, and you would be able to control schemas, boosting, defaults fields, etc for each index independently. Best regards François On Aug 23, 2012, at 11:45 AM, Nicholas Ding nicholas...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you, but I don't want to filter those ads. For example, when user make a search like q=Car Result list: 1. Ford Automobile (score 10) 2. Honda Civic (score 9) ... ... ... 99. Paid Ads (score 1, Ad has own field to identify it's an Ad) What I want to find is a way to make the score of Paid Ads higher than Ford Automobile. Basically, the result structure will look like - [Paid Ads Section] [Most valuable Ads 1] [Most valuable Ads 2] [Less valuable Ads 1] [Less valuable Ads 2] - [Relevant Results Section] On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Karthick Duraisamy Soundararaj karthick.soundara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi You might add an int field Search Rule that identifies the type of search. example Search Rule Description 0 Unpaid Search 1 Paid Search - Rule 1 2 Paid Serch - Rule 2 You can use filterqueries ( http://wiki.apache.org/solr/CommonQueryParameters) like fq: Search Rule :[1 TO *] Alternatively, You can even use a boolean field to identify whether or not a search is paid and then an addtitional field that identifies the type of paid search. -- karthick On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Nicholas Ding nicholas...@gmail.com wrote: Hi I'm working on Solr to build a local business search in China. We have a special requirement from advertiser. When user makes a search, if the results contain paid advertisements, those ads need to be moved on the top of results. For different ads, they have detailed rules about which comes first. Could anyone offer me some suggestions how I customize the ranking based on my requirement? Thanks Nicholas
Re: recommended SSD
You should check this at pcper.com: http://pcper.com/ssd-decoder http://pcper.com/content/SSD-Decoder-popup Specs for a wide range of SSDs. Best regards François On Aug 23, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Peyman Faratin pey...@robustlinks.com wrote: Hi Is there a SSD brand and spec that the community recommends for an index of size 56G with mostly reads? We are evaluating this one http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227706 thank you Peyman
Re: Solr 4.0 Beta missing example/conf files?
Tom - I corrected, on both trunk and 4_x, a reference to solr/conf (to solr/collection1/conf) in tutorial.html. I didn't see anything in example/README that needed fixing. Was there something that is awry there that needs correcting that I missed? If so, feel free to file a JIRA marked for 4.0 so we can be sure to fix it before final release. Thanks, Erik On Aug 22, 2012, at 16:32 , Tom Burton-West wrote: Thanks Markus! Should the README.txt file in solr/example be updated to reflect this? Is that something I need to enter a JIRA issue for? Tom On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Markus Jelsma markus.jel...@openindex.iowrote: Hi - The example has been moved to collection1/ -Original message- From:Tom Burton-West tburt...@umich.edu Sent: Wed 22-Aug-2012 20:59 To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Solr 4.0 Beta missing example/conf files? Hello, Usually in the example/solr file in Solr distributions there is a populated conf file. However in the distribution I downloaded of solr 4.0.0-BETA, there is no /conf directory. Has this been moved somewhere? Tom ls -l apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA/example/solr total 107 drwxr-sr-x 2 tburtonw dlps0 May 29 13:02 bin drwxr-sr-x 3 tburtonw dlps 22 Jun 28 09:21 collection1 -rw-r--r-- 1 tburtonw dlps 2259 May 29 13:02 README.txt -rw-r--r-- 1 tburtonw dlps 2171 Jul 31 19:35 solr.xml -rw-r--r-- 1 tburtonw dlps 501 May 29 13:02 zoo.cfg
Re: The way to customize ranking?
Yes, I think do two separate calls to Solr could solve my problem. But I really want to reduce the HTTP requests to Solr, if I could write a Solr extension and place my ranking logics to inside, that could be perfect. On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Savvas Andreas Moysidis savvas.andreas.moysi...@gmail.com wrote: Could you not apply this logic in your solr client prior to displaying the results? On 23 August 2012 20:56, François Schiettecatte fschietteca...@gmail.com wrote: I would create two indices, one with your content and one with your ads. This approach would allow you to precisely control how many ads you pull back and how you merge them into the results, and you would be able to control schemas, boosting, defaults fields, etc for each index independently. Best regards François On Aug 23, 2012, at 11:45 AM, Nicholas Ding nicholas...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you, but I don't want to filter those ads. For example, when user make a search like q=Car Result list: 1. Ford Automobile (score 10) 2. Honda Civic (score 9) ... ... ... 99. Paid Ads (score 1, Ad has own field to identify it's an Ad) What I want to find is a way to make the score of Paid Ads higher than Ford Automobile. Basically, the result structure will look like - [Paid Ads Section] [Most valuable Ads 1] [Most valuable Ads 2] [Less valuable Ads 1] [Less valuable Ads 2] - [Relevant Results Section] On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Karthick Duraisamy Soundararaj karthick.soundara...@gmail.com wrote: Hi You might add an int field Search Rule that identifies the type of search. example Search Rule Description 0 Unpaid Search 1 Paid Search - Rule 1 2 Paid Serch - Rule 2 You can use filterqueries ( http://wiki.apache.org/solr/CommonQueryParameters) like fq: Search Rule :[1 TO *] Alternatively, You can even use a boolean field to identify whether or not a search is paid and then an addtitional field that identifies the type of paid search. -- karthick On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Nicholas Ding nicholas...@gmail.com wrote: Hi I'm working on Solr to build a local business search in China. We have a special requirement from advertiser. When user makes a search, if the results contain paid advertisements, those ads need to be moved on the top of results. For different ads, they have detailed rules about which comes first. Could anyone offer me some suggestions how I customize the ranking based on my requirement? Thanks Nicholas
Re: Querying top n of each facet value
Thank you Tanguy. This seems to work: group = true group.field = Category group.limit = 5 http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FieldCollapsing group.limit [number] The number of results (documents) to return for each group. Defaults to 1. On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 1:33 AM, Tanguy Moal tanguy.m...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Kiran, I think you can try turning grouping on and group on, and ask solr to group on the Category field. Nevertheless, this will *not* ensure you that groups are returned in facet counts order. This will *not* ensure you the mincount per group neither. Hope this helps, -- Tanguy 2012/8/23 Kiran Jayakumar kiranjuni...@gmail.com Hi everyone, I am building an auto complete feature, which facets by a field called Category. I want to return a minimum number of documents per facet (say min=1 max=5). The facet output is something like Category A: 500 B: 10 C: 2 By default, it is returning 10 documents of category A. I want it to return a total of 10 documents, with 1 document atleast for each facet value. Is it possible to accomplish that with a single query ? Thanks
Re: Cloud assigning incorrect port to shards
Can you post your solr.xml file? On Thursday, August 23, 2012, Buttler, David wrote: I am using the jetty container from the example. The only thing I have done is change the schema to match up my documents rather than the example -Original Message- From: Mark Miller [mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com javascript:;] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 5:50 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org javascript:; Subject: Re: Cloud assigning incorrect port to shards What container are you using? Sent from my iPhone On Aug 22, 2012, at 3:14 PM, Buttler, David buttl...@llnl.govjavascript:; wrote: Hi, I have set up a Solr 4 beta cloud cluster. I have uploaded a config directory, and linked it with a configuration name. I have started two solr on two computers and added a couple of shards using the Core Admin function on the admin page. When I go to the admin cloud view, the shards all have the computer name and port attached to them. BUT, the port is the default port (8983), and not the port that I assigned on the command line. I can still connect to the correct port, and not the reported port. I anticipate that this will lead to errors when I get to doing distributed query, as zookeeper seems to be collecting incorrect information. Any thoughts as to why the incorrect port is being stored in zookeeper? Thanks, Dave -- - Mark http://www.lucidimagination.com
Solr Index problem
Hi, I have setup Solr to index data from Oracle DB through DIH handler. However through Solr admin I could see the DB connection is successfull, data retrieved from DB to Solr but not added into index. The message is that 0 documents added even when I am able to see that 9 records are returned back. The schema and fields in db-data-config.xml are one and the same. Please suggest if anything I should look for. -- Regards, Ran...
Re: Solr Index problem
On Aug 23, 2012, at 4:46 PM, ranmatrix S ranmat...@gmail.com wrote: The schema and fields in db-data-config.xml are one and the same. Please attach or post both the schema and the DIH config XML files so we can see them. The DIH can be pretty tricky. You say you can see 9 records are returned back. How do you see that? xoa -- Andy Lester = a...@petdance.com = www.petdance.com = AIM:petdance
RE: Solr Index problem
Are you committing? You have to commit for them to be actually added -Original Message- From: ranmatrix S [mailto:ranmat...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:46 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Solr Index problem Hi, I have setup Solr to index data from Oracle DB through DIH handler. However through Solr admin I could see the DB connection is successfull, data retrieved from DB to Solr but not added into index. The message is that 0 documents added even when I am able to see that 9 records are returned back. The schema and fields in db-data-config.xml are one and the same. Please suggest if anything I should look for. -- Regards, Ran...
Re: Solr 4.0 Beta missing example/conf files?
Thanks Erik! What confused me in the README is that it wasn't clear what files/directorys need to be in Solr home and what files/directories need to be in SolrHome/corename. For example the /conf and /data directories are now under the core subdirectory. What about /lib and /bin? Will a core use a conf file in SolrHome/conf if there is no Solrhome/collection1/conf directory? Also when upgrading from a previous Solr setup that doesn't use a core, I was definitely confused about whether or not it is mandatory to have core with Solr 4.0. And when I tried not using a solr.xml file, it was very wierd to still get a message about a missing collection1 core directory. See this JIRA issue:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3753 Tom On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Erik Hatcher erik.hatc...@gmail.comwrote: Tom - I corrected, on both trunk and 4_x, a reference to solr/conf (to solr/collection1/conf) in tutorial.html. I didn't see anything in example/README that needed fixing. Was there something that is awry there that needs correcting that I missed? If so, feel free to file a JIRA marked for 4.0 so we can be sure to fix it before final release. Thanks, Erik On Aug 22, 2012, at 16:32 , Tom Burton-West wrote: Thanks Markus! Should the README.txt file in solr/example be updated to reflect this? Is that something I need to enter a JIRA issue for? Tom On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Markus Jelsma markus.jel...@openindex.iowrote: Hi - The example has been moved to collection1/ -Original message- From:Tom Burton-West tburt...@umich.edu Sent: Wed 22-Aug-2012 20:59 To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Solr 4.0 Beta missing example/conf files? Hello, Usually in the example/solr file in Solr distributions there is a populated conf file. However in the distribution I downloaded of solr 4.0.0-BETA, there is no /conf directory. Has this been moved somewhere? Tom ls -l apache-solr-4.0.0-BETA/example/solr total 107 drwxr-sr-x 2 tburtonw dlps0 May 29 13:02 bin drwxr-sr-x 3 tburtonw dlps 22 Jun 28 09:21 collection1 -rw-r--r-- 1 tburtonw dlps 2259 May 29 13:02 README.txt -rw-r--r-- 1 tburtonw dlps 2171 Jul 31 19:35 solr.xml -rw-r--r-- 1 tburtonw dlps 501 May 29 13:02 zoo.cfg
Re: Solr Custom Filter Factory - How to pass parameters?
Can someone please point to some samples on how to implement custom SolrEventListeners? Whats the default behavior of Solr when no SolrEventListeners are configured in solrconfig.xml. I am trying to understand how does custom listener fit in with default listeners (if there are any) Thanks -K'Rider - Thanks -K'Rider -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Custom-Filter-Factory-How-to-pass-parameters-handle-PostProcessing-tp4002217p4003014.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
