Re: Solr - facet fields that contain other facet fields

Erick, I am not sure when you say "the only available terms are "not" and "necessarily"" is totally correct. I go into the schema browser and I can see that there are two terms "not" and "not necessarily" with the correct count. Unless these are not the terms you are talking about. Can you

RE: post.jar with security.json

I do have authorization and authentication setup in security.json: the question is how to pass the login and password into post.jar and/or into solr-5.4.0/bin/post -- it does not seem to like the user:pswd@host:8983/solr/corename/update syntax from SOLR-5960: when I try that, it complains

RE: post.jar with security.json

Or to put it another way, how does one get security.json to work with SOLR-5960? Has anyone any suggestions? -Original Message- From: Oakley, Craig (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 2:12 PM To: 'solr-user@lucene.apache.org' Subject:

Re: Changing Solr Schema with Data

Thanks guys for your responses. @Shalin: Do you have a documentation that explains this? Moreover, is it only for Solr 5+ or is it still applicable to Solr 3+? I am asking this as I am working in a team and in some of our projects we are using old Solr versions and I need to convince the guys

Re: Solr5.X document loss in splitting shards

Hi, the only way that i find to solve my problem is to do the split using a solr instance configured in standalone mode. curl http://localhost:8983/solr/admin/cores?action=SPLIT=sepa=/nas_perf_2/FRAGMENTS/17MINDEXES/1/index=/nas_perf/FRAGMENTS/17MINDEXES/2/index In solr_cloud mode does the

Re: Solr5.X document loss in splitting shards

Hi, the only way that i find to solve my problem is to do the split using a solr instance configured in standalone mode. curl http://localhost:8983/solr/admin/cores?action=SPLIT=sepa=/nas_perf_2/FRAGMENTS/17MINDEXES/1/index=/nas_perf/FRAGMENTS/17MINDEXES/2/index In solr_cloud mode does the

Re: post.jar with security.json

You will probably find that the SimplePostTool (aka post.jar) has not been updated to take into account security.json functionality. Thus, the way to do this would be to look at the source code (it will just use SolrJ to connect to Solr) and make enhancements to get it to work (or if you're not

Re: multi term analyzer error

Hi Eyal, What is your analyzer definition for multi-term? In your example, is star charter separated from the term by a space? Ahmet On Tuesday, December 29, 2015 3:26 PM, Eyal Naamati wrote: Hi, I defined a multi-term analyzer to my analysis chain, and

Re: post.jar with security.json

Hi Craig, To pass the username and password, you'll want to enable authorization and authentication in security.json as is mentioned in this blog post in step 1 of "Enabling Basic Authentication". https://lucidworks.com/blog/2015/08/17/securing-solr-basic-auth--rules/ Is this what you're

Re: How to achieve join like behavior on solr-cloud

Alok, You can use the Streaming API to achieve this goal but joins have not been added to a 5.X release (at least I don't see it on the changelog). They do exist on trunk and will be a part of Solr 6. Documentation is still under development but if you wanted to play around with it now you could

Re: Changing Solr Schema with Data

What shalin says is solid and will work with solr 5.x as well as 3.x You could do a little poc if you want to be absolutely certain. Shouldn't take you very long. Your only concern will be that your old docs won't be matched against queries matched against the newly added fields. On Tue, 29 Dec

SOLR replicas performance

Hi, I have an 260M documents index (90GB) with this structure: where the fragmetnt field contains XML messagges. There is a search function that provide the messagges satisfying a search criterion. TARGET: To find the best

Re: Facet shows deleted values...

Let's be sure we're using terms similarly That article is from 2010, so is unreliable in the 5.2 world, I'd ignore that. First, facets should always reflect the latest commit, regardless of expungeDeletes or optimizes/forcemerges. _commits_ are definitely recommended. Optimize/forcemerge

Re: Issue with Join

Thoughts? I can duplicate it at will... On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 9:02 PM, William Bell wrote: > I have having issues with {!join}. If the core have multiValued field and > the inner join does not have a multiValued field it does not find the > ones... > > Solr 5.3.1...

Memory Usage increases by a lot during and after optimization .

Hi, I am facing a situation, when I do an optimization by clicking on the "Optimized" button on the Solr Admin Overview UI, the memory usage of the server increases gradually, until it reaches near the maximum memory available. There is 64GB of memory available in the server. Even after the

Re: Memory Usage increases by a lot during and after optimization .

Do not “optimize". It is a forced merge, not an optimization. It was a mistake to ever name it “optimize”. Solr automatically merges as needed. There are a few situations where a force merge might make a small difference. Maybe 10% or 20%, no one had bothered to measure it. If your index is

Re: Solr - facet fields that contain other facet fields

Sorry, I overlooked the ShingleFilterFactory. You're getting that from, presumably, your ShingleFilterFactory. Note that the minShingleSize=2 does not mean that only 2-shingles are output, there's yet another parameter "outputUnigrams" that controls that in combination with

Re: Facet shows deleted values...

I believe the problem here is that terms from the deleted docs still appear in the facets, even with a doc count of 0, is that it? Can you use facet.mincount=1 or would that not be a good fit for your use case?

Facet shows deleted values...

I am purging some of my data on regular basis, but when I run a facet query, the deleted values are still shown in the facet list. Seems, commit with expunge resolves this issue (http://grokbase.com/t/lucene/solr-user/106313v302/deleted-documents-appearing-in-facet-fields ). But it seems,

Re: Memory Usage increases by a lot during and after optimization .

Hi Walter, Thanks for your reply. Then how about optimization after indexing? Normally the index size is much larger after indexing, then after optimization, the index size reduces. Do we still need to do that? Regards, Edwin On 30 December 2015 at 10:45, Walter Underwood

Re: Memory Usage increases by a lot during and after optimization .

The only time that a force merge might be useful is when you reindex all content every night or every week, then do not make any changes until the next reindex. But even then, it probably does not matter. Just let Solr do its thing. Solr is pretty smart. A long time ago (1996-2006), I worked

Re: Solr index segment level merge

Would collection aliases be an option (assuming you are using SolrCloud mode)? https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Collections+API#CollectionsAPI-api4 On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Erick Erickson wrote: > Could you simply add the new documents to the

Re: Solr index segment level merge

You probably do not NEED to merge your indexes. Have you tried not merging the indexes? wunder Walter Underwood wun...@wunderwood.org http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) > On Dec 29, 2015, at 7:31 PM, jeba earnest wrote: > > I have a scenario that I need to merge

Having replica will slow down Solr?

Hi, I would like to find out, will having a replica slow down the search for Solr? Currently, I'm having 1 shard and a replicationFactor of 2 using Solr 5.3.0. I'm running SolrCloud, with 3 external ZooKeeper using ZooKeeper 3.4.6, and my index size is 183GB. I have been getting QTime of more

Solr index segment level merge

I have a scenario that I need to merge the solr indexes online. I have a primary solr index of 100 Gb and it is serving the end users and it can't go offline for a moment. Everyday new lucene indexes(2 GB) are generated separately. I have tried coreadmin

Re: Memory Usage increases by a lot during and after optimization .

Some people also want to control when major segment merges happen, and optimizing at a known time helps prevent a major merge at an unknown time (which can be equivalent to an optimize/forceMerge). The benefits of optimizing (and having fewer segments to search across) will vary depending on the

Re: Solr index segment level merge

Could you simply add the new documents to the current index? That aside, merging does not need to create a new core or a new folder. The form: mergeindexes=core0=/opt/solr/core1/data/index=/opt/solr/core2/data/index Should merge the indexes from the two directories into the pre-existing core's

Re: Memory Usage increases by a lot during and after optimization .

Thanks for the information. Another thing I like to confirm is, will the Java Heap size setting affect the optimization process or the memory usage? Is the any recommended setting that we can use, for an index size of 200GB? Regards, Edwin On 30 December 2015 at 11:07, Walter Underwood

RE: multi term analyzer error

Hi Ahmet, Yes there is a space in my example. This is my multiterm analyzer: Thanks! Eyal Naamati Alma Developer Tel: +972-2-6499313 Mobile: +972-547915255 eyal.naam...@exlibrisgroup.com www.exlibrisgroup.com -Original Message- From: Ahmet Arslan

Re: Memory Usage increases by a lot during and after optimization .

Question: does anyone have example good merge settings for solrconfig ? To keep the number of segments small like 6? On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 8:49 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: > Some people also want to control when major segment merges happen, and > optimizing at a known time

RE: SolrMeter is still a feasible tool for measuring performances?

Thanks to everyone, I'll give it a try because it seems very useful. Compiling with maven is really trivial, and it is not indeed a problem. I've a customer that asked me if developers can find an official compiled version instead of compiling on their machine. The solution is probably sharing

[More Like This] Query building

Hi guys, While I was exploring the way we build the More Like This query, I discovered a part I am not convinced of : Let's see how we build the query : org.apache.lucene.queries.mlt.MoreLikeThis#retrieveTerms(int) 1) we extract the terms from the interesting fields, adding them to a map :

Re: mlt and document boost

Hi Upaya, talking about wrapping the MLT query parser with additional query parsers : let's assume I want to run my MLT query + 2 boost functions on the results to affect the ranking. Can you give me an example of how to wrap them together ? Those two are the independent pieces : {!boost

Re: [More Like This] Query building

Feel free to create a JIRA and put up a patch if you can. On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Alessandro Benedetti wrote: > Hi guys, > While I was exploring the way we build the More Like This query, I > discovered a part I am not convinced of : > > > > Let's see how we

multi term analyzer error

Hi, I defined a multi-term analyzer to my analysis chain, and it works as I expect. However, for some queries (for example '* or 'term *') I get an exception "analyzer returned no terms for multiTerm term". These queries work when I don't customize a multi-term analyzer. My question: is there

Re: [More Like This] Query building

Sure, I will proceed tomorrow with the Jira and the simple patch + tests. In the meantime let's try to collect some additional feedback. Cheers On 29 December 2015 at 12:43, Anshum Gupta wrote: > Feel free to create a JIRA and put up a patch if you can. > > On Tue, Dec

Re: Solr5.X document loss in splitting shards

Hi Shawn, I'm looking for the docs num from the core overview page and the situation is: Num Docs: 35031923Max Doc: 35156879 The difference doesn't explain the strange behavior. On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > On 12/26/2015 11:21 AM, Luca

How to achieve join like behavior on solr-cloud

Hello , I am aware of the fact that Solr (I am using 5.2) does not support join on distributed search with documents to be joined residing on different shards/collections. My use case is I want to fetch uuid of documents that are resultant of a search and also those docs which are outside this

Re: mlt and document boost

That might work, but this might be clearer: q={!boost b=recip(dist(2, 0, star_rating, 0, 3),1,10,10) v=$mlt}& mlt={!mlt qf=name,description,facilities,resort,region,dest_level_2 mintf=1 mindf=3 maxqt=100}43083 Upayavira On Tue, Dec 29, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Alessandro Benedetti wrote: > I simply

Re: mlt and document boost

I simply concatenated them : q={!boost b=recip(dist(2,0,star_rating,0,3),1,10,10)}{!mlt qf=name,description,facilities,resort,region,dest_level_2 mintf=1 mindf=3 maxqt=100}43083 >From the debug query the syntax is fine. Am i correct ? Cheers On 29 December 2015 at 11:48, Alessandro Benedetti