- Lucene/Solr Open Source Search Conference.
Boston May 7-10
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Yonik Seeley
yo...@lucidimagination.com wrote:
Hmmm, this looks like it's generated by DocumentBuilder with the code
catch( Exception ex ) {
throw new SolrException
Over-aggressive license checking code doesn't like jars in extraneous
directories (like the work directory that the war is exploded into
under exampleB).
delete exampleB and the build should work.
-Yonik
lucenerevolution.com - Lucene/Solr Open Source Search Conference.
Boston May 7-10
On Mon,
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Michael Jakl jakl.mich...@gmail.com wrote:
The topic field holds roughly 5
values per doc, but I wasn't able to compute the correct number right
now.
How many unique values for that field in the whole index?
If you have log output (or output from the stats page
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Markus Jelsma
markus.jel...@openindex.io wrote:
The Linux machines have proper settings for ulimit and friends, 32k open files
allowed
Maybe you can expand on this point.
cat /proc/sys/fs/file-max
cat /proc/sys/fs/nr_open
Those take precedence over ulimit.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there a ticket around doing this?
Around splitting shards?
The easiest thing to consider is just splitting a single shard in two
reusing some of the existing buffering/replication mechanisms we have.
1) create two new
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.com wrote:
Would you hypothesize that lazy field loading could be that much
slower if a large fraction of fields were selected?
If you actually use the lazy field later, it will cause an extra read
for each field.
If you don't
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm trying to upgrade an application I have from an old snapshot of
solr to the latest stable trunk and see that the constructor for
Filter has changed, specifically there is another parameter named
acceptDocs, the API
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
I.e. just do if(!acceptDocs.get(doc)) return false; at
the top?
Yep, that should do it.
-Yonik
lucenerevolution.com - Lucene/Solr Open Source Search Conference.
Boston May 7-10
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
Unfortunately, Apache Solr still uses this horrible code in a lot of
places, leaving us with a major piece of work undone. Major parts of
Solr’s facetting and filter caching need to be rewritten to work per
atomic segment!
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
How large will the transaction log grow, and how long should it be kept
around?
We keep around enough logs to satisfy a minimum of 100 updates
lookback. Unneeded log files are deleted automatically.
When a hard commit is
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 6:55 AM, Em mailformailingli...@yahoo.de wrote:
However, regarding a versioning-system, one always has to keep in mind
that an uncommited document is not guaranteed to be persisted in the index.
We now have durability via an update log.
With a recent nightly trunk build,
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Per Steffensen st...@designware.dk wrote:
Cool. We have a test doing exactly that - indexing 2000 documents into Solr,
kill-9'ing Solr in the middle of the process, starting Solr again and
checking that 2000 documents will eventually be searchable. It lights red
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Per Steffensen st...@designware.dk wrote:
We might make it outside Solr/Lucene but I
hope to be able to convince my ProductOwner to make it as a Solr-feature
contributing it back - especiallly if the Solr community agrees that it
would be a nice and commonly
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 10:25 AM, naptowndev naptowndev...@gmail.com wrote:
Our current config for that is as follows:
documentCache class=*solr.LRUCache* size=*15000*
initialSize=*15000*autowarmCount
=*0* /
It's the same for both instances
I assume the asterisks are for emphasis and are
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 11:24 AM, naptowndev naptowndev...@gmail.com wrote:
Another question I have is regarding solr.LRUCache vs. solr.FastLRUCache.
Would there be reason to implement (or not implement) fastLRU on the
documentcache?
LRUCache can be faster if the hit rate is really low (i.e.
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 9:27 AM, prasenjit mukherjee
prasen@gmail.com wrote:
Is anybody aware of any effort regarding porting solr to a netty ( or
any other async-io based framework ) based framework.
Even on medium load ( 10 parallel clients ) with 16 shards
performance seems to
2012/2/22 Yury Kats yuryk...@yahoo.com:
On 2/22/2012 12:25 PM, Yury Kats wrote:
I'm running into a problem with queries that contain forward slashes and
more than one field.
For example, these queries work fine:
fieldName:/a
fieldName:/*
But if I have two fields with similar syntax in
This should be fixed in trunk by LUCENE-2566
QueryParser: Unary operators +,-,! will not be treated as operators if
they are followed by whitespace.
-Yonik
lucidimagination.com
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 2:09 PM, jmlucjav jmluc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am using edismax with end user entered
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Greg Pelly gfpe...@gmail.com wrote:
I exported a csv file from SOLR and made some changes, I then tried to
reimport the file and got the exception below. It seems UUID field type
can't import multi-values, I removed all of the multi-values and it
imported
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Mark Miller markrmil...@gmail.com wrote:
When exactly is this build from?
Yeah... I just checked in a fix yesterday dealing with sync while
indexing is going on.
-Yonik
lucidimagination.com
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm seeing the following. Do I need a _version_ long field in my schema?
Yep... versions are the way we keep things sane (shuffled updates to a
replica can be correctly reordered, etc).
-Yonik
lucidimagination.com
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
Something that didn't work though
was if a node was down when a delete happened and then comes back up,
that node still listed the id I deleted. Is this currently supported?
Yes, that should work fine. Are you still
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
This was with the cloud-dev solrcloud-start.sh script (after that I've
used solrcloud-start-existing.sh).
Essentially I run ./solrcloud-start-existing.sh
index docs
kill 1 of the solr instances (using kill -9 on the pid)
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:35 AM, flyingeagle-de
flyingeagle...@yahoo.de wrote:
Hello,
I want to copy all data from a multivalued field joined together in a single
valued field.
Is there any opportunity to do this by using solr-standards?
There is not currently, but it certainly makes
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Alexey Verkhovsky
alexey.verkhov...@gmail.com wrote:
5. All Solr caching is switched off.
But why?
Because (a) I shouldn't need to cache documents, if they are all in memory
anyway;
Your're making many assumptions about how Solr works internally.
One
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Alexey Verkhovsky
alexey.verkhov...@gmail.com wrote:
ly need ids, scores and total number of results out of Solr. Presentation of
selected entities will have to include some write-heavy data (from RDBMS
and/or memcached), therefore won't be Solr's business
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Paulo Magalhaes
paulo.magalh...@gmail.com wrote:
I was loading a big (60 million docs) csv in solr 4 when something odd
happened.
I got a solr error in the log saying that it could not write the file.
du -s indicated I had used 30Gb of a 50Gb available but df
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to be able to facet based on the time of
day items are purchased across a date span. I was hoping that I could
do a query of something like date:[NOW-1WEEK TO NOW] and then specify
I wanted facet broken into
.
-Yonik
lucidimagination.com
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Yonik Seeley
yo...@lucidimagination.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to be able to facet based on the time of
day items are purchased across a date span. I
Perhaps this is some kind of vufind specific issue?
The server (/example) bundled with solr unpacks the war in
/example/work and not /tmp
-Yonik
lucidimagination.com
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Bernhardt, Russell (CIV)
rgber...@nps.edu wrote:
A software package we use recently upgraded to
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@lucidimagination.com wrote:
One way to speed up numeric range queries (at the cost of increased
index size) is to lower the precisionStep. You could try changing
this from 8 to 4 and then re-indexing to see how that affects your
query speed
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
Was there a fix recently to address sorting issues for Dates in solr
cloud? On my cluster I have a date field which when I sort across the
cluster I get incorrect order executing the following query I get
Yikes! There
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
So looking at query component it appears to sort the entire doc list
at the end of process, my component is defined after this query so the
doclist that I get should be sorted, right? To me this should mean
that I can
Well, not super-new (it's in 3.4), but the spatial post-filtering is
brand new in 4.0 as of today, and I don't think cache=false and
post-filtering was really highlighted well before anyway.
http://www.lucidimagination.com/blog/2012/02/10/advanced-filter-caching-in-solr/
-Yonik
2012/2/9 Matthias Käppler matth...@qype.com:
arr name=filter_queries
str{!bbox cache=false d=50 sfield=location_ll pt=54.1434,-0.452322}/str
/arr
arr name=parsed_filter_queries
str
WrappedQuery({!cache=false
cost=0}+location_ll_0_coordinate:[53.69373983225355 TO
54.59306016774645]
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 3:30 PM, oleole oleol...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for your reply. Yeah that's the first thing I tried (adding fsv=true
to the query) and it surprised me too. Could it due to we're using many
complex sortings (20 sortings with dismax, and, or...). Any thing it can be
, Yonik Seeley yo...@lucidimagination.com
wrote:
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 3:30 PM, oleole oleol...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for your reply. Yeah that's the first thing I tried (adding
fsv=true
to the query) and it surprised me too. Could it due to we're using many
complex sortings (20
that don't contain embedded
relevancy queries, I would definitely not expect the degradation you
are seeing - hence we should try to get to the bottom of this.
-Yonik
lucidimagination.com
XJ
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@lucidimagination.com
wrote:
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 1:20 AM, XJ oleol...@gmail.com wrote:
When I look into details (slow queries), I found some real issues that I
need help with. For example, a query which takes 200ms with geo sharding,
now timeout (2000ms) with distributed search. And each shard query
(isShard=true)
Thanks for your persistence in tracking this down Mike!
I'm going to start looking into this now...
-Yonik
lucidimagination.com
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Mike Hugo m...@piragua.com wrote:
I created issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3062 for this
problem. I was able to
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:46 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
I just want to verify some of the features in regards to SolrCloud
that are now on Trunk
documents added to the cluster are automatically distributed amongst
the available shards (I had seen that Yonik had ported the
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
Second question, I know there are discussion about storing the shard
assignments in ZK (i.e. shard 1 is responsible for hashed values
between 0 and 10, shard 2 is responsible for hashed values between 11
and 20, etc), this
You can use LegacyHTMLStripCharFilterFactory to get the previous behavior.
See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3690 for more details.
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Mike Hugo m...@piragua.com wrote:
We recently updated to the latest build
Oops, I didn't read carefully enough to see that you wanted those constructs
entirely stripped out.
Given that you're seeing numbers indexed, this strongly indicates an
escaping bug in the SolrJ client that must have been introduced at
some point.
I'll see if I can reproduce it in a unit test.
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:15 PM, gabriel shen xshco...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Yonik,
The index I am querying against is 20gb, containing 200,000documents, some
of the documents are quite big, the schema contains more than 50 fields.
Main content field are defined as both stored and indexed,
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Daniel Bruegge
daniel.brue...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
I have asked the question already over Stackoverflow (
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8913654/solr-hides-some-facet-fields-when-doing-a-distributed-search),
but maybe someone here can give me a hint
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 9:39 AM, gabriel shen xshco...@gmail.com wrote:
For those customers who unluckily send un-prewarmed query, they will suffer
from bad response time, it is not too pleasant anyway.
The warming caches part isn't about unique queries, but more about
caches used for sorting
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm trying to figure out a way to execute a query which would allow me
to say there were x documents over this period of time with type a, y
documents over the same period of time with type b and z documents
over the same
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Lee Carroll
lee.a.carr...@googlemail.com wrote:
if type is a field use field faceting with an fq
q=datefield:[start TO end]fq=type:(a b c)facet.field=type
Yep, that will work too.
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Ken Krugler
kkrugler_li...@transpac.com wrote:
I finally got around to looking at why short field values are returned as
java.lang.Short:value.
Both XMLWriter.writeVal() and TextResponseWriter.writeVal() are missing the
check for (val instanceof Short), and
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Yonik Seeley
yo...@lucidimagination.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Ken Krugler
kkrugler_li...@transpac.com wrote:
I finally got around to looking at why short field values are returned
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Erik Hatcher erik.hatc...@gmail.com wrote:
As I understand it, the document and filter caches add value *intra* request
such that it keeps additional work (like fetching stored fields from disk
more than once) from occurring.
Yep. Highlighting, multi-select
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Jason Rutherglen
jason.rutherg...@gmail.com wrote:
Yikes. I'd love to see a test showing that un-inverted field cache
(which is for ALL segments as a single unit) can be used efficiently
with NRT / soft commit.
Please stop being a troll.
Solr as multiple
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Mark Miller markrmil...@gmail.com wrote:
Right - in most NRT cases (very frequent soft commits), the cache should
probably be disabled.
Did you mean autowarm should be disabled (as it already is in the
example config)?
It still normally makes sense to have the
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Jason Rutherglen
jason.rutherg...@gmail.com wrote:
It still normally makes sense to have the caches enabled (esp filter and
document caches).
In the NRT case that statement is completely incorrect
*shrug*
To each their own. I stand my my statement.
-Yonik
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Michael Ryan mr...@moreover.com wrote:
I was wondering... how does the TrieField precisionStep value affect the
speed of non-range queries and sorting?
I'm assuming that int (precisionStep=0) is no slower than tint
(precisionStep=8) for these - is that
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Avner Levy av...@checkpoint.com wrote:
Thanks Mark, I appreciate your help.
I need the Solr index to be in sync with my database.
This means that even if one record was added I need it to appear in the next
search (including faceting).
You could just add
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 5:47 AM, ku3ia dem...@gmail.com wrote:
So, based on p.2) and on my previous researches, I conclude, that the more
documents I want to retrieve, the slower is search and main problem is the
cycle in writeDocs method. Am I right? Can you advice something in this
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 2:16 AM, Parvin Gasimzade
parvin.gasimz...@gmail.com wrote:
I have created custom Solr FunctionQuery in Solr 3.4.
I extended ValueSourceParser, ValueSource, Query and QParserPlugin classes.
Note that you only need a QParserPlugin implementation for top level
query types,
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Lyuba Romanchuk
lyuba.romanc...@gmail.com wrote:
I test facets and stats in Solr 3.5 and I see that queries are running a
lot slower during inserts into index with more than 15M documents .
Are you also doing commits (or have autocommit enabled)?
The first time
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 6:16 PM, Chris Hostetter
hossman_luc...@fucit.org wrote:
Solr can
not reasonably compute stats on a multivalued field
Wasn't that added here?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1380
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Tom Lianza t...@wishpot.com wrote:
We're seeing the same thing (though we're not using replication). Based on
the trace, it looks like it would happen when Solr's response is too slow
for the client, and it's trying to send a response back to someone who's no
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Scott Smith ssm...@mainstreamdata.com wrote:
If I read the 3.5 lucene javadocs, optimize() has been deprecated because it
is rarely justified with the current lucene index implementation
It's functionality is not being deprecated... it's just that the
method is
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
What does the version field need to look like?
It's in the example schema:
field name=_version_ type=long indexed=true stored=true/
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
In this
situation I don't think splitting one shard would help us we'd need to
split every shard to reduce the load on the burdened systems right?
Sure... but if you can split one, you can split them all :-)
-Yonik
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 6:23 AM, Per Steffensen st...@designware.dk wrote:
Will it be possible to maintain a how-to-use section on
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/NewSolrCloudDesign with examples, e.g. like to
ones on http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrCloud,
Yep, it was on my near-term todo list to
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Mark Miller markrmil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
I am currently looking at the latest solrcloud branch and was
wondering if there was any documentation on configuring the
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Mark Miller markrmil...@gmail.com wrote:
You always want to use the distrib-update-chain. Eventually it will
probably be part of the default chain and auto turn in zk mode.
I'm working on this now...
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 7:08 AM, Pawel Rog pawelro...@gmail.com wrote:
at
org.apache.solr.search.SolrIndexSearcher.getDocSet(SolrIndexSearcher.java:702)
at
org.apache.solr.search.SolrIndexSearcher.getDocListC(SolrIndexSearcher.java:1144)
at
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Pawel pawelmis...@gmail.com wrote:
I've build index on solr 1.4 some time ago (about 18milions documents,
about 8GB). I need new features from newer version of solr, so i
decided to upgrade solr version from 1.4 to 3.5.
* I created new solr master on new
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Stephen Powis
stephen.po...@pardot.com wrote:
Just trying to get a better understanding of this.Wouldn't the indexes
not being in the disk cache make the queries themselves slow as well (high
qTime), not just fetching the results?
What happens in
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Brian Lamb
brian.l...@journalexperts.com wrote:
http://localhost:8983/solr/mycore/search/?q=test {!boost b=2}
it is still really slow. Is there a different approach I should be taking?
I just tried what something similar to this (a non-boosted query vs a
simple
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Jak Akdemir jakde...@gmail.com wrote:
2) I am sure about delta-queries configured well. Full-Import is completed
in 40 secs for 40 docs. And delta's are in 1 sec for 15 new records.
Also I checked it. There is no problem in it.
That's 10,000 docs/sec. If
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:34 PM, Erick Erickson erickerick...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmmm. It is suspicious that your index files change every
second.
Why is this suspicious?
A soft commit still writes out some files currently... it just doesn't
fsync them.
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jak Akdemir jakde...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it ok to see soft committed records after server restart, too?
Yes... we currently have Jetty configured to call some cleanups on
exit (such as closing the index writer).
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Ivan Hrytsyuk
ihryts...@softserveinc.com wrote:
For 5000 documents (every document has 2 unique fields, 2*5000=1
unique fields in index), index size is 48.24 MB.
You might be able to turn this around and encode the unique field
information in a multi-valued
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Chris Hostetter
hossman_luc...@fucit.org wrote:
: I understand that's a valid thing for faceting to do, I was just wondering
: if there's any way to get it to do the faceting on the groups returned.
: Otherwise I guess I'll need to convince the UI people to just
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Milan Dobrota mi...@milandobrota.com wrote:
Is there any way to define the default value for the dynamic fields in
SOLR? I use some dynamic fields of type float with _val_ and if they
haven't been created at index time, the value defaults to 0. I would want
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Michael McCandless
luc...@mikemccandless.com wrote:
I saw a mention somewhere that you can tell Solr not to use
IW.addDocument (not IW.updateDocument) when you add a document if you
are certain it's not replacing a previous document with the same ID
Right -
=text indexed=false stored=true
multiValued=true/
So should I have another for _latLon? Would it look like:
dynamicField name=*_latLon type=double indexed=true stored=true/
-- Chris
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Yonik Seeley
yo...@lucidimagination.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:42
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Christopher Gross cogr...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm using the geohash field to store points for my data. When I do a
bounding box like:
localhost:8080/solr/select?q=point:[-45,-80%20TO%20-24,-39]
I get a data point that falls outside the box: (-73.03358
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Christopher Gross cogr...@gmail.com wrote:
I can roll back and use the LatLon type -- but then I'm still
concerned about the bounding box giving results outside the specified
range.
The implementation of things like bbox are intimately tied to the
field type
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Torsten Krah
tk...@fachschaft.imn.htwk-leipzig.de wrote:
I am getting this SolrException Too many values for UnInvertedField
faceting on field autocompleteField.
Already added facet.method=enum to my search handler definition but
still this exception does
Can you give an example of the request (URL) you are sending to Solr?
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Jason Toy jason...@gmail.com wrote:
I have 2 types of docs, users and posts.
I want to view all the docs that belong to certain users by joining posts
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Jonty Rhods jonty.rh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I am using solrj and for connection to server I am using instance of the
solr server:
SolrServer server = new CommonsHttpSolrServer(
http://localhost:8080/solr/core0;);
Are you reusing the server object for all
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Esteban Donato
esteban.don...@gmail.com wrote:
I found soft commits very useful for NRT search requirements.
However I couldn't figure out how replication works with this feature.
I mean, if I have N replicas of an index for load balancing purposes,
when I
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm doing some work on the solrcloud branch in SVN and am noticing
some strange (but perhaps expected) behavior when executing queries.
I have setup a simple 2 shard cluster, indexed 50 documents into each
(verified by
Hmmm, try adding fl={!func}Count
to make sure Count is an indexed field and function queries are
getting the right values.
-Yonik
http://www.lucene-eurocon.com - The Lucene/Solr User Conference
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 3:42 PM, abhayd ajdabhol...@hotmail.com wrote:
hi
I am trying to sort
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Chris Hostetter
hossman_luc...@fucit.org wrote:
: OK, if SOLR-2403 being related to the bug I described, has been fixed in
: SOLR 3.4 than we are safe, since we are in the process of migration. Is it
: possible to verify this somehow? Is FacetComponent class is
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Jason Toy jason...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm testing out the join functionality on the svn revision 1175424.
I've found when I add a single filter query to a join it works fine, but
when I do more then 1 filter query, the query does not return results.
This single
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:17 AM, dar...@ontrenet.com wrote:
Hi,
I am very excited to see this direction for Solr. I realize its early
still,
but is there any thought as to what the target release date might be (this
year? next?).
We've started to work on the new functionallity now, but
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Mark juszczec mark.juszc...@gmail.com wrote:
We've also tried making it create
field:a\ b
The first case just does not work and I'm unsure why.
The second case ends up url encoding the \ and I'm unsure if that will cause
it to be used in the query or not.
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Mark juszczec mark.juszc...@gmail.com wrote:
I am looking for a text string with a single, embedded space. For the
purposes of this example, it is a b and its stored in the index in a field
called field.
Am I incorrect in assuming the query field:a b will
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Mark juszczec mark.juszc...@gmail.com wrote:
That's what I thought. The problem is, its not and I am unsure what is
wrong.
What is the fieldType definition for that field? Did you change it
without re-indexing?
-Yonik
http://www.lucene-eurocon.com - The
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:56 PM, simon mtnes...@gmail.com wrote:
If you're batching the documents when you send them to Solr with the #add
method, you may be out of luck - Solr doesn't do a very good job of
reporting which document in a batch caused the failure.
If you reverted to
Are you able to share the source code for this CombiningFilter?
This sounds like it should be a relatively simple filter.
-Yonik
http://www.lucene-eurocon.com - The Lucene/Solr User Conference
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
I'm left with childrenshospitallosangeles as a single token resultant from
the chain.
So, when I go to sort the titles in Solr, I use sort=title_sort asc, and I am
getting all kinds of weird
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any configuration that can be done to change the Doc
Collector used in SolrIndexSearcher?
The most generic way would be to use a post-filter (which can insert a
custom collector into the chain).
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Jamie Johnson jej2...@gmail.com wrote:
Also I see that this is before sorting, is there a way to do something
similar after sorting?
If you want post-sorting, then you don't want anything based on Collector.
A custom search component that runs after the query
Turns out this isn't a bug - I was just tripped up by the analysis
changes to the example server.
Gary, you are probably just hitting the same thing.
The text fieldType is no longer used by any fields by default - for
example the text field uses the text_general fieldType.
This fieldType uses the
701 - 800 of 2724 matches
Mail list logo
