Hi all,
A few doubts about commits.
1)If no commit parameters are passed from a client (solarium) update, will
the autoSoftCommit values automatically work?
2) When we are not committing from the client, when will the data actually
be flushed to disk?
Regards,
Jayadevan
Hello Solr community,
We tried to split shard of one collection which contains 80M documents. After
running for few hours it failed with the exception
org.apache.solr.common.SolrException.
Upon further investigation, I found below exception
Caused by:
There may be other ways, easiest way is to write a script that gets the cluster
status, and for each collection per replica you will have these details:
"collections":{
“collection1":{
"pullReplicas":"0",
"replicationFactor":"1",
"shards":{
"shard1":{
Glad u nailed the out of sync one :)
> On Aug 12, 2020, at 4:38 PM, Jae Joo wrote:
>
> I found it the root cause. I have 3 collections assigned to a alias and one
> of them are NOT synched.
> By the alias.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Collection 1
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
I found it the root cause. I have 3 collections assigned to a alias and one
of them are NOT synched.
By the alias.
Collection 1
Collection 2
Collection 3
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 7:29 PM Jae Joo wrote:
> Good question. How can I validate if the replicas
Different absolute scores from different collections are OK, because
the exact values depend on the number of deleted documents.
For the set of documents that are in different orders from different
collections, are the scores of that set identical? If they are, then it
is normal to have a
Good question. How can I validate if the replicas are all synched?
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 7:28 PM Jae Joo wrote:
> numFound is same but different score.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 6:01 PM Aroop Ganguly
> wrote:
>
>> Try a simple test of querying each collection 5 times
numFound is same but different score.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 6:01 PM Aroop Ganguly
wrote:
> Try a simple test of querying each collection 5 times in a row, if the
> numFound are different for a single collection within tase 5 calls then u
> have it.
> Please try it, what you may think
Try a simple test of querying each collection 5 times in a row, if the numFound
are different for a single collection within tase 5 calls then u have it.
Please try it, what you may think is sync’d may actually not be. How do you
validate correct sync ?
> On Aug 12, 2020, at 10:55 AM, Jae Joo
Are the scores the same for the documents that are ordered differently?
wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
> On Aug 12, 2020, at 10:55 AM, Jae Joo wrote:
>
> The replications are all synched and there are no updates while I was
> testing.
>
The replications are all synched and there are no updates while I was
testing.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 1:49 PM Aroop Ganguly
wrote:
> Most likely you have 1 or more collections behind the alias that have
> replicas out of sync :)
>
> Try querying each collection to find the one out of sync.
>
Most likely you have 1 or more collections behind the alias that have replicas
out of sync :)
Try querying each collection to find the one out of sync.
> On Aug 12, 2020, at 10:47 AM, Jae Joo wrote:
>
> I have 10 collections in single alias and having different result sets for
> every time
I have 10 collections in single alias and having different result sets for
every time with the same query.
Is it as designed or do I miss something?
The configuration and schema for all 10 collections are identical.
Thanks,
Jae
Hi,
We've just recently gone through the process of upgrading Solr the 8.6 and
have implemented an automated rolling update mechanism to allow us to more
easily make changes to our cluster in the future.
Our process for this looks like this:
1. Cluster has 3 nodes.
2. Scale out to 6 nodes.
3.
The version it's working on is 8.5!
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 at 17:16, Norbert Kutasi
wrote:
> I see what you mean, however the request results in cartesian products ,
> because of subordinate.q=*:* :
>
> http://localhost:8981/solr/Collection1/query?q=*=*,subordinate:[subquery]=*:*=*=Collection2
>
Is there any way to do a query for the minimum number of times a phrase or
string exists in a document? This has been a request from some users as
other search services (names not to be mentioned) have such a
functionality. Ive been using solr since 1.4 and i think ive tried finding
this ability
I see what you mean, however the request results in cartesian products ,
because of subordinate.q=*:* :
http://localhost:8981/solr/Collection1/query?q=*=*,subordinate:[subquery]=*:*=*=Collection2
{
"responseHeader":{
"zkConnected":true,
"status":0,
"QTime":0,
"params":{
This works from a browser:
http://localhost:8981/solr/Collection1/query?q=*=*,subordinate:[subquery]=*:*=*=Collection2
One problem you’re having is that “fromIndex” is a _core_ not a collection. See:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_2/transforming-result-documents.html
It’s vaguely
There’s no particular need to do this unless you have a very large
number of leaders on a single node. That functionality was added
for a special case where there were 100s of leaders on the same
node.
The fact that a leader happens to be on a node that’s going away
shouldn’t matter at all; as
Probably a typo but I think you mean qf rather than pf?
They’re both actually valid, but pf is “phrase field” which will give different
results….
Best,
Erick
> On Aug 12, 2020, at 5:26 AM, Edward Turner wrote:
>
> Many thanks for your suggestions.
>
> We do use edismax and bq fields to
Yeah, unfortunately I don’t have much do offer when it comes to autoscaling….
> On Aug 12, 2020, at 8:09 AM, Anton Pfennig wrote:
>
> Hi Erick,
>
> thx!
> the idea behind is to have a dedicated Kubernetes deployment for each
> collection. So e.g. if I need more solr nodes for particular
Hi Erick,
thx!
the idea behind is to have a dedicated Kubernetes deployment for each
collection. So e.g. if I need more solr nodes for particular collection I would
just scale the Kubernetes deployment and solr should automatically add new
replicas to these new nodes.
does it makes sense?
Autoscaling may be overkill, Is this a one-time thing or something you need
automated?
Because for a one-time event, it’s simpler/faster just to specify
createNodeSet with the CREATE command that lists the new machines you want the
collection to be placed on.
Note that there’s the special value
Hi guys,
in my solr setup as SolrCloud (8.3.1) I’m using 5 nodes for one collection (say
“collection1”, one on each node.
Now I would like to add a new collection on the same solr cluster but
additionally the new collection (say “collection2”) should be only replicated
on only nodes with
Hi Dominique,
Sorry, I was in a hurry to create a simple enough yet similar case that we
face with internally.
reporting_to indeed is the right field , but the same error still persists,
something is seemingly wrong when invoking the *subquery *with *fromIndex*
{
params: {
q: "*",
fq:
Hi Norbert,
The field name in collection2 is "reporting_to" not "reporting".
Dominique
Le mer. 12 août 2020 à 11:59, Norbert Kutasi a
écrit :
> Hello,
>
> We have been using [subquery] to come up with arbitrary complex hierarchies
> in our document responses.
>
> It works well as long as
Hello,
We have been using [subquery] to come up with arbitrary complex hierarchies
in our document responses.
It works well as long as the documents are in the same collection however
based on the reference guide I infer it can bring in documents from
different collections except it throws an
Many thanks for your suggestions.
We do use edismax and bq fields to help with our result ranking, but we'd
never thought about using it for this purpose (we were stuck on the
copyfield pattern + df pattern). This is a good suggestion though thank you.
We're now exploring the use of the pf field
Hi,
We've just recently gone through the process of upgrading Solr the 8.6 and
have implemented an automated rolling update mechanism to allow us to more
easily make changes to our cluster in the future.
Our process for this looks like this:
1. Cluster has 3 nodes.
2. Scale out to 6 nodes.
3.
29 matches
Mail list logo
