I submitted a patch a few months back for a Solr Document Inspector which
allows one to see the indexed values for any document in a Solr index (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1837). This is more or less a
port of Luke's DocumentReconstructor into Solr, but the tool additionally
has
You can reload the core on which you want to reset the stats - this lets you
keep the engine up and running without requiring you restart Solr. If you
have an separate core for aggregating (i.e. a core that contains no data and
has no caches) then the overhead for reloading that core is
: reloading the core just to reset the stats definitely seems like throwing
: out the baby with the bathwater.
Agreed about throwing out the baby with the bath water - if stats need to be
reset, though, then that's the only way today. A reset stats button would
be a nice way to prevent having to
I was just hoping someone might be able to point me in the right direction
here. We just upgraded from Solr 1.4 to Solr 3.1 this past week and we're
having issues running out of disk space on our Master servers. Our Master
has dozens of cores. We have a script that kicks off once per day to do
, May
25-26, San Francisco
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Trey Grainger solrt...@gmail.com wrote:
I was just hoping someone might be able to point me in the right
direction
here. We just upgraded from Solr 1.4 to Solr 3.1 this past week and
we're
having issues running out of disk space
Hey (solr-user) Mailing list admin's,
I've tried replying to a thread multiple times tonight, and keep getting a
bounce-back with this response:
Technical details of permanent failure:
Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the recipient
domain. We recommend contacting the
. If not, it will often send HTML-mails.
Regards,
Em
Marvin Humphrey wrote:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:30:29AM -0400, Trey Grainger wrote:
(FREEMAIL_FROM,FS_REPLICA,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
Note
Hey Bernd,
Checkout https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2469. There is a
pretty bad bug in Solr 3.1 which occurs if you have str
name=replicateAfterstartup/str set in your replication
configuration in solrconfig.xml. See the thread between Yonik and
myself from a few days ago titled
Linux will cache the open index files in RAM (in the filesystem cache)
after their first read which makes the ram disk generally useless.
Unless you're processing other files on the box with a size greater
than your total unused ram (and thus need to micro-manage what stays
in RAM), then I
remove the JSP dependency and this may eventually making it into trunk.
Thanks,
-Trey Grainger
Search Technology Development Team Lead, Careerbuilder.com
Site Architect, Celiaccess.com
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Gabriele Kahlout
gabri...@mysimpatico.comwrote:
Hello,
With an inverted
Please add TreyGrainger to the the contributors group. Thanks!
-Trey
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 11:18 PM, Steve Rowe sar...@gmail.com wrote:
The wiki at http://wiki.apache.org/solr/ has come under attack by
spammers more frequently of late, so the PMC has decided to lock it down in
an attempt
While on this topic...
Is it still true in Solr 4.5 (RC) that it is not possible to have a shared
config directory? In general, I like the new core.properties mechanism
better as it removes the unnecessary centralized configuration of cores in
solr.xml, but I have an infrastructure where I have
Hi Isaac,
In the process of writing Solr in Action (http://solrinaction.com), I have
built the solution to SOLR-5053 for the multilingual search chapter (I
didn't realize this ticket existed at the time). The solution was
something I called a MultiTextField. Essentially, the field let's you
map
Hi David,
What version of the Solr in Action MEAP are you looking at (current version
is 12, and version 13 is coming out later this week, and prior versions had
significant bugs in the code you are referencing)? I added an update
processor in the most recent version that can do language
Yeah, the documentation is definitely wrong - it definitely doesn't
concatenate the values in a multivalued field, it only uses the first one
like you mentioned.
If you want to detect the language of each of the values in the
multi-valued field (as opposed to specifying multiple separate string
We're working on the same problem with the combination of the
scale(query(...)) combination, so I'd like to share a bit more information
that may be useful.
*On the scale function:*
Even thought the scale query has to calculate the scores for all documents,
it is actually doing this work twice
Hmm... haven't run into the case where null was returned in a multi-valued
scenario yet... I probably just haven't tested that case. I likely need to
add a null check there - thanks for pointing it out.
-Trey
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Müller, Stephan
muel...@ponton-consulting.de wrote:
Hi Dave,
Sorry for the delayed reply. Did you end up trying the (scary) caching
idea?
Yeah, there's no reasonable way today to access data from other fields from
the document in the analyzers. Creating an update request processor which
pulls the data prior to the field-by-field analysis and
FYI, the last distributed pivot facet patch functionally works, but there
are some sub-optimal data structures being used and some unnecessary
duplicate processing of values. As a result, we found that for certain
worst-case scenarios (i.e. data is not randomly distributed across Solr
cores and
Of course, if you want to take a simpler route, you can always just copy
your text to two separate fields (one per language) and then search across
them at query time using the eDisMax query parser. There are pros and cons
to both approaches.
All the best,
-Trey Grainger
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 8:00
source code are also available* at http://solrinaction.com.
I would love it if you would check the book out, and I would also
appreciate your feedback on it, especially if you find the book to be a
useful guide as you are working with Solr! Timothy Potter and I (Trey
Grainger) worked tirelessly
regards,
Trey Grainger
Co-author, Solr in Action
Director of Engineering, Search Analytics @CareerBuilder
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Philippe Soares soa...@genomequest.com
wrote:
Thanks Trey !
I just tried to download my copy from my manning account, and this final
version appears only
and run the code examples for free, though they may be harder to
follow without the context from the book.
Thanks,
Trey Grainger
Co-author, Solr in Action
Director of Engineering, Search Analytics @CareerBuilder
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 4:34 AM, Liu Bo diabl...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jeremy
,
Trey Grainger
Co-author, Solr in Action
Director of Engineering, Search Analytics @ CareerBuilder
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Michael Sokolov
msoko...@safaribooksonline.com wrote:
The lack of response to this question makes me think that either there is
no good answer, or maybe
.
As you mentioned, it is possible to utilize tags and excludes to change the
behavior described above, but hopefully this answers your question about
the default behavior.
Thanks,
Trey Grainger
Co-author, Solr in Action
Director of Engineering, Search Analytics @ CareerBuilder
On Sun, Apr 27
No problem, Mike. Glad you got it sorted out.
Trey Grainger
Co-author, Solr in Action
Director of Engineering, Search Analytics @ CareerBuilder
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 7:23 PM, Michael Sokolov
msoko...@safaribooksonline.com wrote:
On 4/27/14 7:02 PM, Michael Sokolov wrote:
On 4/27/2014 6
about
multilingual search in November at Lucene/Solr Revolution, so I'd ideally
like to finish before then so I can demonstrate it there.
Thanks,
-Trey Grainger
Director of Engineering, Search Analytics @ CareerBuilder
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Jorge Luis Betancourt Gonzalez
jlbetanco
Just curious if there are some suggestions here. The use case is fairly
simple:
Given a query like python OR solr OR hadoop, I want to sort results by
number of keywords matched first, and by relevancy separately.
I can think of ways to do this, but not efficiently. For example, I could
do:
, but some of the
problems Walter mentioned may eventually bite you if you are supporting
certain groups of languages.
All the best,
Trey Grainger
Co-author, Solr in Action
Director of Engineering, Search Recommendations @ CareerBuilder
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 11:14 PM, Walter Underwood wun
Agreed, I also prefer the second way. I find it more readible, less verbose
while communicating the same information, less confusing to mentally parse
(is 'terms' the name of my facet, or the type of my facet?...), and less
prone to syntactlcally valid, but logically invalid inputs. Let's break
analytical capabilities therein. Once again,
several other talks on faceting and analytics, but there was quite a strong
committer focus on that topic.
Definitely worth checking out the slides and videos when they are posted -
lots of really good material all around.
Trey Grainger
Co-author, Solr
losing IDF per-field (you'll still have it globally across all fields). If
you want to use a catch-all field, but still want to boost content based
upon the field it originated within, you can accomplish this with payloads.
All the best,
Trey Grainger
Co-author, Solr in Action
Director of Engineering,
I'd be very interested in taking a look if you post the code.
Trey Grainger
Co-Author, Solr in Action
Director of Engineering, Search & Recommendations @ CareerBuilder
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 3:09 PM, r b <chopf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been working on something that just monit
on it, and (for anyone on the mailing list who is contemplating
buying it), it is a REALLY great book that will teach you the ins and outs
of how search relevancy works under the covers and how you can manipulate
and improve it. It's very well-written, and definitely worth the read.
Congrats again, guys.
Trey Grainger
I know a bunch of folks who would be likely attend the hackday (including
committers) will have some other meetings on Wednesday before the
conference, so I think that Tuesday is actually a pretty good time to have
this.
My 2 cents,
Trey Grainger
SVP of Engineering @ Lucidworks
Co-author, Solr
certainly be done. Just wanted to mention it as another approach
to solve this specific problem.
-Trey Grainger
SVP of Engineering @ Lucidworks
Co-author, Solr in Action
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Markus Jelsma <markus.jel...@openindex.io>
wrote:
> Indeed, we have similar
Shawn and Joel both answered the question with seemingly opposite answers,
but Joel's should be right. On Deck, as an idiom, means "getting ready to
go next". I think it has it's history in military / naval terminology (a
plane being "on deck" of an aircraft carrier was the next one to take off),
Hi David, that's my fault. I need to do a final proofread through them
before they get posted (and may have to push one quick code change, as
well). I'll try to get that done within the next few days.
All the best,
Trey Grainger
SVP of Engineering @ Lucidworks
Co-author, Solr in Action <h
This way, the xml query parser is loaded in as a version of the eDismax
query parser instead, and any queries the are trying to reference the xml
query parser through local params will instead hit the eDismax query parser
and use its parsing logic instead.
All the best,
Trey Grainger
SVP of E
ww.slideshare.net/treygrainger/how-to-build-a-semantic-search-system
All the best,
Trey Grainger
Chief Algorithms Officer @ Lucidworks
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 11:45 AM Moyer, Brett wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Looking for ideas on how to determine intent and drive results to
make sure everyone in the development and user community
here was aware of the conference and didn't miss the opportunity to submit
a talk by Wednesday if interested.
All the best,
Trey Grainger
Chief Algorithms Officer @ Lucidworks
https://www.linkedin.com/in/treygrainger/
c and well established meaning of "replica" within Solr.
All the Best,
Trey Grainger
Founder, Searchkernel
https://searchkernel.com
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 3:38 PM Anshum Gupta wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Moving a conversation that was happening on the PMC list to the public
&g
d followers, whereas in
standalone mode you have to manage them manually (as is the case with most
things in SolrCloud vs. Standalone).
My view is that having an entirely different set of terminology describing
the same thing is way more cognitive overhead than having consistent
terminology.
Trey Grainger
F
is true that Standalone mode does not currently have support for
two of the replica TYPES that SolrCloud mode does, but I maintain that
leader vs. follower behavior is inconsistent here.
Trey Grainger
Founder, Searchkernel
https://searchkernel.com
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 5:41 PM Walter Underwood
wr
Sorry:
>
> but I maintain that leader vs. follower behavior is inconsistent here.
Sorry, that should have said "I maintain that leader vs. follower behavior
is consistent here."
Trey Grainger
Founder, Searchkernel
https://searchkernel.com
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 6:03 PM Trey
arly distinguish between modes. Regardless
of the naming decided on, I'm in support of removing the master/slave
nomenclature.
Trey Grainger
Founder, Searchkernel
https://searchkernel.com
On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 7:00 PM Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 6/17/2020 2:36 PM, Trey Grainger wrote:
> > 2)
managed Clustering" Mode
Alt F: "Managed Clustering" vs. "Manual Clustering" Mode
?
I think I prefer option F.
Trey Grainger
Founder, Searchkernel
https://searchkernel.com
On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 5:59 PM Jan Høydahl wrote:
> I support Mike Drob and Trey Grainger.
47 matches
Mail list logo
