Hi Geoff, I can't find anything in the code which would give this exception when both q and spellcheck.q is specified. Though, this exception is certainly possible when you restart solr. Anyways, I'll look into it more deeply.
There are a few ways in which we can improve this component. For example a lot of this trouble can go away if we can reload the spell index on startup if it exists or build it if it does not exist (SOLR-593 would need to be resolved for this). With SOLR-605 committed, we can now add an option to re-build the index (built from Solr fields) on commits by adding a listener using the API. There are a few issues with collation which are being handled in SOLR-606. I'll open new issues to track these items. Please bear with us since this is a new component and may take a few iterations to stabilize. Thank you for helping us find these issues :) On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 6:32 PM, Geoffrey Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > When I made: >> >> http://localhost:8080/solr/spellCheckCompRH?q=*:*&spellcheck.q=ruck&spellcheck=true >> >> I have this exception: >> >> Estado HTTP 500 - null java.lang.NullPointerException at >> >> org.apache.solr.handler.component.SpellCheckComponent.getTokens(SpellCheckComponent.java:217) >> > > > I see this all the time - to the point where I wonder how stable the new > component is. > > I've *think* I've traced it to > > o the presence of both q *and* spellcheck.q > o and *any* restart of solr without re-issuing spellcheck.build=true > > I haven't been using any form of spellchecker for long, but I'm reasonably > sure that I didn't need to rebuild on every restart. I also used to think > it was changes to schema.xml (and not a simple restart) that caused the > issue, but I've seen the exception with no changes. I've also seen the > exception pop up without a restart when the server sits overnight (last > query of the day ok, go to sleep, query again in the morning and *boom*) > > but regardless of restart issues, I've never seen it happen with just the q > or just the spellcheck.q fields in my query - it's always when they're both > there. > > --Geoff > -- Regards, Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
