It worked! Thanks Mr. Rafalovitch. I just removed “type”: “query”.. keys from
the json, and used indexAnalyzer and queryAnalyzer in place of analyzer json
node.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From: Alexandre Rafalovitch
Sent: 03 March 2021 01:19
To: solr-user
Subject: Re: Schema API specifying
ndexAnalyzer":{
"tokenizer":{
"class":"solr.PathHierarchyTokenizerFactory",
"delimiter":"/" }},
"queryAnalyzer":{
"tokenizer":{
"class":"solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory&q
{
"class": "solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"
}
]
},{
"type": "index",
"tokenizer": {
"class": "solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory"
},
"filters": [
{
"class": "solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"
}
]
}]
}
}
"errorMessages":["Plugin init failure for [schema.xml]
"msg":"error processing commands",...
How can I specify different analyzers for query and index type when using
schema api?
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
at row
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 16 Feb 2021, at 20:42, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> >
> >> On 2/16/2021 9:16 AM, ufuk yılmaz wrote:
> >> I didn’t realise that, sorry. The table is like:
> >> Flags Indexed Tokenized Stored UnInverti
> I didn’t realise that, sorry. The table is like:
>> Flags Indexed Tokenized Stored UnInvertible
>> Properties YesYesYes Yes
>> Schema YesYesYes Yes
>> Index YesYes
On 2/16/2021 9:16 AM, ufuk yılmaz wrote:
I didn’t realise that, sorry. The table is like:
Flags Indexed Tokenized Stored UnInvertible
Properties YesYesYes Yes
Schema YesYesYes Yes
Index Yes
I didn’t realise that, sorry. The table is like:
Flags Indexed Tokenized Stored UnInvertible
Properties YesYesYes Yes
Schema YesYesYes Yes
Index YesYesYes
This list strips attachments so you'll have to figure out another way to
show the difference,
Cheers
Charlie
On 16/02/2021 15:16, ufuk yılmaz wrote:
There’s a collection at our customer’s site giving weird exceptions
when a particular field is involved (asked another question detailing
There’s a collection at our customer’s site giving weird exceptions when a
particular field is involved (asked another question detailing that).
When I inspected it, there’s only one difference between it and other dozens of
fine working collections, which is,
A text_general field in all
Hi,
I’ve encountered another issue that might be related to nested schema.
Not always, but many times atomic updates fails for some shards with the
message “TransactionLog doesn't know how to serialize class
org.apache.lucene.document.LazyDocument$LazyField”.
I checked both options:
1
Hi,
I've encountered another issue that might be related to nested schema.
Not always, but many times atomic updates fails for some shards with the
message "TransactionLog doesn't know how to serialize class
org.apache.lucene.document.LazyDocument$LazyField".
The client retrieves
Hi,
I've encountered another issue that might be related to nested schema.
Not always, but many times atomic updates fails for some shards with the
message "TransactionLog doesn't know how to serialize class
org.apache.lucene.document.LazyDocument$LazyField".
I checked both options:
Hello,
I was checking why my initial schema change is taking several minutes using the
managed schema api.
VisualVm shows that most of the time is used in
ManagedIndexSchema.postReadInform
[cid:image001.png@01D6CEE9.16DA5EC0]
Looking at the code shows that postReadInform is executed for every
config set action=create (from _default) and saw files i
> > > didn't recognize, and a lot *fewer* things than I've been uploading
> > > for the last few years.
> > >
> > > Anyway my new plan is to just use _default and keep params.json,
> > > solrconfig.xm
g set action=create (from _default) and saw files i
> > didn't recognize, and a lot *fewer* things than I've been uploading
> > for the last few years.
> >
> > Anyway my new plan is to just use _default and keep params.json,
> > solrconfig.xml, and schema.xml in git and ju
_default and keep params.json,
> solrconfig.xml, and schema.xml in git and just use the defaults for
> the rest. (modulo synonyms/etc)
>
> Did everyone move on to managed schema and use some kind of
> intermediate format to upload?
>
> I'm just looking for updated best practices
and keep params.json,
solrconfig.xml, and schema.xml in git and just use the defaults for
the rest. (modulo synonyms/etc)
Did everyone move on to managed schema and use some kind of
intermediate format to upload?
I'm just looking for updated best practices and a little survey of usage trends
writing here. I
> >> hope I don't do anything wrong.
> >> I went to create the "bug" ticket and saw it would be a good idea to
> first
> >> talk to some of you via IRC (didn't work for me or I did something wrong
> >> after 20 years of not using it
gt;>
>> First of all, I wanted to say that this is my first time writing here. I
>> hope I don't do anything wrong.
>> I went to create the "bug" ticket and saw it would be a good idea to first
>> talk to some of you via IRC (didn't work for me or I did s
ears of not using it..)
>
> I'm currently using Solr 8.1.1 in production and I use the Schema API to
> create the necessary fields before starting to index my new data. (Reason,
> the managed-schema would be big for me to take care of and I decided to
> automate this process by using the RE
not using it..)
I'm currently using Solr 8.1.1 in production and I use the Schema API to
create the necessary fields before starting to index my new data. (Reason,
the managed-schema would be big for me to take care of and I decided to
automate this process by using the REST API).
I started trying
Hi Chris,
Chris Hostetter-3 wrote
> ...ExternalFileField is "special" and as noted in it's docs it is not
> searchable -- it doesn't actaully care what the indexed (or "stored")
> properties are ... but the default values of those properties as assigend
>
Chris Hostetter-3 wrote
> : *
> : class="solr.ExternalFileField" valType="float"/>
> *
> :
> : *
>
> *
> ...
> : I was expecting that for field "fieldA" indexed will be marked as false
> and
> : it will not be part of the i
: **
:
: **
...
: I was expecting that for field "fieldA" indexed will be marked as false and
: it will not be part of the index. But Solr admin "SCHEMA page" (we get this
: option after selecting collection name in the drop-down menu) is showing
: it as an indexed fi
Vadim Ivanov wrote
> Hello, Raj
>
> I've just checked my Schema page for external file field
>
> Solr version 8.3.1 gives only such parameters for externalFileField:
>
>
> Field: fff
>
> Field-Type:
>
> org.apache.solr.schema.ExternalFileField
>
>
Hello, Raj
I've just checked my Schema page for external file field
Solr version 8.3.1 gives only such parameters for externalFileField:
Field: fff
Field-Type:
org.apache.solr.schema.ExternalFileField
Flags:
UnInvertible
Omit Term Frequencies & Positions
Properties
√
√
Are u
only for function queries or display."*
I was expecting that for field "fieldA" indexed will be marked as false and
it will not be part of the index. But Solr admin "SCHEMA page" (we get this
option after selecting collection name in the drop-down menu) is showing
it as an
the text in the documents matching the regex. eg. INFPWSV01,
PLCPLDB01
I've index the files using Solr/Tikka/Tesseract using the default schema.
I've used the highlight search tool
hl ticked
hl.usePhraseHighlighter ticked
Solr only returns the metadata (presumably) like filename for the file
e name of the unique key field of a
> >>> schema. So far, no matter what I've done, Solr is returning a 404.
>
> The Luke Request Handler, normally assigned to the /admin/luke path,
> will give you the info you're after. On a stock Solr install, the
> following URL would wor
On 5/14/2020 1:13 PM, Mark H. Wood wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 10:11:40AM -0600, Shawn Heisey wrote:
On 4/16/2020 10:07 AM, Mark H. Wood wrote:
I need to ask Solr 4.10 for the name of the unique key field of a
schema. So far, no matter what I've done, Solr is returning a 404.
The Luke
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 03:13:07PM -0400, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> Anyway, I'll be reading up on how to upgrade to 5. (Hopefully not
> farther, just yet -- changes between, I think, 5 and 6 mean I'd have
> to spend a week reloading 10 years worth of data. For now I don't
> want to go any farther
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 10:11:40AM -0600, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 4/16/2020 10:07 AM, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> > I need to ask Solr 4.10 for the name of the unique key field of a
> > schema. So far, no matter what I've done, Solr is returning a 404.
> >
> > This wor
gt; field already exists in the schema (stacktrace is at the bottom of this
> post). My solr is v8.5.1 running in standard/non-cloud mode.
>
> $> curl -X POST -H 'Content-Type: application/json'
> 'http://localhost:8983/solr/mycore/update' --data-binary '[{
> &quo
Choose whichever example is closest to what you want to do. Then strip it down
removing everything you don’t use. Note that _default configset has schema
guessing enabled which you don’t want in production.
Jan Høydahl
> 9. mai 2020 kl. 22:34 skrev Steven White :
>
> Hi
Hi everyone,
There are multiple copies with each a bit different of the
files solrconfig.xml and the various schema files. Should I be using
what's under \solr-8.5.1\server\solr\configsets\_default\conf as my
foundation to build on?
Thanks
Steve
I am running into a exception where creating child docs fails unless the
field already exists in the schema (stacktrace is at the bottom of this
post). My solr is v8.5.1 running in standard/non-cloud mode.
$> curl -X POST -H 'Content-Type: application/json'
'http://localhost:8983/solr/myc
Hi folks,
I am using solr 8.5.0 in standalone mode and use the CoreAdmin API and
Schema API of solrj to create new core and its fields in managed-schema
Is there any way to add several fields to managed-schema by solrj without
processing each by each?
The following two rows make the job done
On 4/16/2020 10:07 AM, Mark H. Wood wrote:
I need to ask Solr 4.10 for the name of the unique key field of a
schema. So far, no matter what I've done, Solr is returning a 404.
This works:
curl 'https://toolshed.wood.net:8443/isw6_3/solr/statistics/select'
This gets a 404:
curl 'https
et:8443/solr/isw6_3/schema/uniquekey
>
> If that’s not the case you need to mention your collection. But in
> either case your collection name comes after /solr/.
Thank you. I think that's what I have now.
> > On Apr 16, 2020, at 12:07 PM, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> >
> &g
Assuming isw6_3 is your collection name, you have
“solr” and “isw6_3” reversed in the URL.
Should be something like:
https://toolshed.wood.net:8443/solr/isw6_3/schema/uniquekey
If that’s not the case you need to mention your collection. But in
either case your collection name comes after /solr
I need to ask Solr 4.10 for the name of the unique key field of a
schema. So far, no matter what I've done, Solr is returning a 404.
This works:
curl 'https://toolshed.wood.net:8443/isw6_3/solr/statistics/select'
This gets a 404:
curl 'https://toolshed.wood.net:8443/isw6_3/solr/statistics
If you are using API (which AdminUI does), the regenerated file will
loose comments and sort everything in particular order. That's just
the implementation at the moment.
If you don't like that, you can always modify the schema file by hand
and reload the core to notice the changes. You can even
The Luke request handler may do what you are asking for already? This
is coming directly from Lucene and doesn't rely on what Solr has in
the schema information.
/admin/luke
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_7/implicit-requesthandlers.html
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SOLR
I was just looking at the Schema Browser for one of our collections. It's
pretty handy. I was thinking that it would be useful to create a tool that
would create a report about what fields were indexed had docValues, were
multivalued etc...
Has someone built such a tool? I want it to aid
You can use the Solr rest services to do all those operations.
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_3/schema-api.html
Normally in a productive environment you don’t use the UI but do all changes in
a controlled automated fashion using the REST APIs.
> Am 06.04.2020 um 20:11 schrieb
I am using Solr 8.3.1 in non-SolrCloud mode (what should I call this mode?) and
modifying managed-schema.
I noticed that Solr does override this file wiping out all my comments and
rearranging the order. I noticed there is a "DO NOT EDIT" comment. Then, what is
the proper/ex
[5] in submitted tasks"}}
I don't see anything in the logs.
-Joe
On 3/6/2020 1:43 PM, Joe Obernberger wrote:
Thank you Erick - I have no record of that, but will absolutely give
the API RELOAD a shot! Thank you!
-Joe
On 3/6/2020 10:26 AM, Erick Erickson wrote:
Didn’t we talk ab
Thank you Erick - I have no record of that, but will absolutely give the
API RELOAD a shot! Thank you!
-Joe
On 3/6/2020 10:26 AM, Erick Erickson wrote:
Didn’t we talk about reloading the collections that share the schema after the
schema change via the collections API RELOAD command?
Best
Didn’t we talk about reloading the collections that share the schema after the
schema change via the collections API RELOAD command?
Best,
Erick
> On Mar 6, 2020, at 05:34, Joe Obernberger
> wrote:
>
> Hi All - any ideas on this? Anything I can try?
>
> Thank you!
>
Hi All - any ideas on this? Anything I can try?
Thank you!
-Joe
On 2/26/2020 9:01 AM, Joe Obernberger wrote:
Hi All - I have several solr collections all with the same schema. If
I add a field to the schema and index it into the collection on which
I added the field, it works fine
Not sure i understood the whole scenario. However did you try to reload (not
reindex) the collection
> Am 26.02.2020 um 15:02 schrieb Joe Obernberger :
>
> Hi All - I have several solr collections all with the same schema. If I add
> a field to the schema and index it into th
Hi All - I have several solr collections all with the same schema. If I
add a field to the schema and index it into the collection on which I
added the field, it works fine. However, if I try to add a document to
a different solr collection that contains the new field (and is using
the same
Hi Karl,
Maybe someone else could help if reindexing is needed if we upgrade Schema
version. However, I guess, useDocValuesAsStored only impacts the query side
assuming docValues had already been stored during indexing. It's actually
easier to try querying the fields after enabling this parameter
Hey,
I’m going to bump our schema version from 1.5 to 1.6 to get the implicit
useDocValuesAsStored=true, would this require a reindex?
Thanks
Karl
This e-mail is sent on behalf of Auto Trader Group Plc, Registered Office: 1
Tony Wilson Place, Manchester, Lancashire, M15 4FN (Registered
Tank you Emir.
I tried this locally (changing schema, re-index all implace)
and I wasn't able to sort on the doc value fields anymore (someone actually
mentioned this before on that forum -
https://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/DocValues-error-td4240116.html)
with the next error
"Error from s
Hi,
1. No, it’s not valid. Solr will look at schema to see if it can use docValues
or if it has to uninvert field and it assumes that all fields will have doc
values. You might expect from wrong results to errors if you do something like
that.
2. Not sure if it would work, but It is not better
Hi all
We are about to alter our schema with some DocValue annotations.
According to docs, we should whether delete all docs and re-insert, or
create a new collection with the new schema.
1. Is it valid to modify the schema in the current collection, where all
documents were created without
That’s a little overstated, a full explanation of what’s safe and what’s not is
several pages and depends on what you mean by “safe”.
Any modification to a schema, even if they don’t cause something to outright
break, may leave the index in an inconsistent state. For instance, remember
Hi all,
I have question about the managed schema functionality. According to the
docs, "All changes to a collection’s schema require reindexing". This would
imply that if you use a managed schema and you use the schema API to update
the schema, then doing a full re-index is necessary
s J wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 1:36 PM Erick Erickson
> wrote:
>
>> Well, just what it says. -schema isn’t a recognized parameter, where did
>> you get it? Did you try bin/solr create -help and follow the instructions
>> there?
>>
>> I am confused
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 1:36 PM Erick Erickson
wrote:
> Well, just what it says. -schema isn’t a recognized parameter, where did
> you get it? Did you try bin/solr create -help and follow the instructions
> there?
>
> I am confused.
This page:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guid
Well, just what it says. -schema isn’t a recognized parameter, where did you
get it? Did you try bin/solr create -help and follow the instructions there?
Best,
Erick
> On Nov 4, 2019, at 12:34 PM, rhys J wrote:
>
> I have created a tmp directory where I want to have reside custom
I have created a tmp directory where I want to have reside custom
managed-schemas to use when creating cores.
/tmp/solr_schema/CORENAME/managed-schema
Based on this page:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_0/coreadmin-api.html#coreadmin-create
, I am running the following command:
sudo -u
On 10/4/2019 2:45 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
It's probably not the way I would do it. I would update a local copy of
the config and then re-upload the entire config rather than dealing with
a single file.
You will also need to reload the collection or restart Solr, and then as
already
On 10/4/2019 10:22 AM, amruth wrote:
*- /opt/zookeeper/bin/zkCli.sh delete
/configs/collection1/managed-schema - /opt/zookeeper/bin/zkCli.sh
create /configs/collection1/managed-schema "`cat
/var/solr/data/collection1/conf/managed-schema`"*
I could see fields on managed-schema
Hello,
I am running SolrCloud 6.6.0 and trying to add new fields to Solr Schema. I
have added fields to /var/solr/data/collection1/conf/managed-schema and
executed,
*- /opt/zookeeper/bin/zkCli.sh delete /configs/collection1/managed-schema
- /opt/zookeeper/bin/zkCli.sh create /configs/collection1
On 7/10/2019 6:52 AM, ericstein wrote:
the documents are in both cores. the official title field data exists in
both. However, it only gives me the official_title_s field in the second
core when I query. When I look at the schema in the admin it only shows the
official_title_s field
The schema
Hi Shawn,
the documents are in both cores. the official title field data exists in
both. However, it only gives me the official_title_s field in the second
core when I query. When I look at the schema in the admin it only shows the
official_title_s field
--
Sent from: http://lucene.472066.n3
On 7/9/2019 5:42 PM, ericstein wrote:
I am expecting both cores to have the following fields:
official_title_s
official_title_t
However, the second core only recognizes:
official_title_s
It seems that the schema doesn't recognize my field the same in both cores.
What do you mean
Hi all,
I am new to the SOLR world, so bear with me. I have currently have 2 cores
that share the same schema, or so I think? I have noticed that certain
fields don't exist in both cores even though they are set to look at the
same config sets (S:\solr-6.1.0\server\solr\configsets
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I am fairly new to solr and I was wondering if there is a way in solr 7.7
> to populate fields based on some pre-processing on other field. So let’s
> say I have a field called fieldX defined in the schema, I want to define
> another fie
I have a field called fieldX defined in the schema, I want to define
> another field called isFieldXgood which is just a Boolean field that shows
> whether the length of fieldX is larger than 10.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Muaawia Bin Arshad
>
Hi Everyone,
I am fairly new to solr and I was wondering if there is a way in solr 7.7 to
populate fields based on some pre-processing on other field. So let’s say I
have a field called fieldX defined in the schema, I want to define another
field called isFieldXgood which is just a Boolean
Hi - according to the documentation here:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_6/schema-api.html
The V2 API is located at api/cores/collection/schema
However the documentation here:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_6/v2-api.html
has it at api/c/collection/schema
I believe the later
Hi, I have a nested document, how should I define this schema?
How to use addChildDocument in solr-solrj?
Thanks
Derrick
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
i,
>
> I have two questions about the field default values for multivalued and
> indexed.
>
>
> 1. Is it possible to make new fields have the indexed attribute set to
> false by default for a schema? I understand this wouldn't normally be the
> case, but we have a use
Hi,
I have two questions about the field default values for multivalued and indexed.
1. Is it possible to make new fields have the indexed attribute set to false
by default for a schema? I understand this wouldn't normally be the case, but
we have a use case where it would be preferable
Finally, since you are trying to really tweak the schema and
general
configuration right from the start, you may find some of my
presentations
useful, as they show the minimal configuration. Not perfect for
your needs,
as I do skip _version, but as an additional data point. The
recent one
Shawn Heisey writes:
On 1/23/2019 3:49 AM, Aleksandar Dimitrov wrote:
Hi Alex,
thanks for you answer. I took the lines directly from the
managed-schema, deleted the managed-schema, and pasted those
lines into
my schema.xml.
Unless you have changed the solrconfig.xml to refer
On 1/23/2019 3:49 AM, Aleksandar Dimitrov wrote:
Hi Alex,
thanks for you answer. I took the lines directly from the
managed-schema, deleted the managed-schema, and pasted those lines into
my schema.xml.
Unless you have changed the solrconfig.xml to refer to the classic
schema, the file named
If you do not use API or Admin to change schema, it will not get
automatically rewritten. So you can just stay with managed-shema file and
version that. You can even disable write changes in solrconfig.xml:
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_6/schema-factory-definition-in-solrconfig.html#solr
Hi Alex,
thanks for you answer. I took the lines directly from the
managed-schema, deleted the managed-schema, and pasted those lines
into
my schema.xml.
If I have other errors in the schema.xml (such as a missing field
type),
solr complains about those until I fix them. So I would guess
What do you mean schema.xml from managed-schema? schema.xml is old
non-managed approach. If you have both, schema.xml will be ignored.
I suspect you are not running with the schema you think you do. You can
check that with API or in Admin UI if you get that far.
Regards,
Alex
On Tue, Jan 22
Hi,
I'm using solr 7.5, in my schema.xml I have this, which I took
from the
managed-schema:
stored="false" />
docValues="true" />
However, on startup, solr complains:
Caused by: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: _version_ field
must exist in schema
variables, etc. and
> 2) What should my Solr schema configuration should be like?
>
> If you have done this and can share you solution, that would be great.
>
> I will be using the latest version of Solr for this project.
>
> Thanks
>
> Steve
names, variables, etc. and
2) What should my Solr schema configuration should be like?
If you have done this and can share you solution, that would be great.
I will be using the latest version of Solr for this project.
Thanks
Steve
have
been using for the last several years. Had some trouble understanding how
to use my current solrconfig and schema, but I got it working and I could
index all the documents without any trouble.
After indexing both collections, the Admin > Cloud > Nodes reports the
expected number of doc
Environment: Solr 7.4
I use mutable managed schema. I need a way for getting notification when a new
field is added into schema.
First, I try to extend "org.apache.solr.schema.ManagedIndexSchema".
Unfortunately, it is defined as final class, so that I am not able to extend it.
T
On 11/28/2018 6:37 AM, Vincenzo D'Amore wrote:
Very likely I'm late to this party :) not sure with solr standalone, but
with solrcloud (7.3.1) you have to reload the core every time synonyms
referenced by a schema are changed.
I have a 7.5.0 download on my workstation, so I fired that up
Very likely I'm late to this party :) not sure with solr standalone, but
with solrcloud (7.3.1) you have to reload the core every time synonyms
referenced by a schema are changed.
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 8:51 PM Walter Underwood
wrote:
> Should be easy to check with the analysis UI.
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
> On Nov 26, 2018, at 11:43 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
>
> I know that changes to the schema require a reload. But do changes to files
> referenced by a schema also require a reload? So if for ins
I know that changes to the schema require a reload. But do changes to
files referenced by a schema also require a reload? So if for instance
I were to change the contents of a synonym file, would I need to reload
the core before Solr would use the new file? Synonyms in this case
gt; Sent: Thursday, 15 November 2018 1:55 PM
> To: solr-user
> Subject: Re: Exporting results and schema design
>
> Well, docValues doesn't necessarily waste much index space if you
> don't store the field and useDocValuesAsStored. It also won't beat up
> your machine as badly if
believed I needed stored=true if I required the fields returned.
Many thanks once again for taking the time to respond,
Dwane
From: Erick Erickson
Sent: Thursday, 15 November 2018 1:55 PM
To: solr-user
Subject: Re: Exporting results and schema design
Well, docValues
urning large
> result sets is using the /export request handler. As none of my fields
> qualify for using then /export handler (i.e. docValues=true) is my only
> option to have additional duplicated fields mapped as strings so they can be
> used in the export process?
&
t process?
i.e. using my example above now managed-schema now becomes
If I did not require highlighting I could change the initial mapped fields
(First_Names, Last_Names) from type=text_general to type=string and save the
additional storage in the index but in my current situat
://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_5/major-changes-from-solr-5-to-solr-6.html
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_5/schema-factory-definition-in-solrconfig.html
-Hoss
http://www.lucidworks.com/
Thanks Alexandre and Shawn.
--
Sent from: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-User-f472068.html
It is not clear what you are trying to achieve?
1) Disable schemaless mode to be more explicit about new fields? New
Solr has a switch for that. Older one, you can just disable the chain
invocation in solrconfig.xml
2) Stop schema being editing at all, whether schemaless or via API
On 10/17/2018 5:36 AM, Zahra Aminolroaya wrote:
What would be the challenges that I will confront with as my schemaless
collection has some indexed documents in it?
If the schema itself (the file named managed-schema that you might be
renaming to schema.xml) hasn't changed, then the existing
1 - 100 of 1703 matches
Mail list logo
