hmmmm,
I am talking about the query for the DIH (Data Import Handler?) that
queries the database to find records/documents to index. We originally were
trying to import aout 20 fields, but have whittled down the schema file (my bad
calling in config) to only try a few fields.
I myself have been STUDYING this whole Solr/Lucene product, while actually
DOING the backend and interface to the front end. HE is doing the search engine
and I'm trying to apply my limited knowledge and ask questions here.
I should have a pow wow with him so we present a united front to ask questions.
I'll start a new thread when we do that. Thanks for the help, Otis. :-)
And for Solr/Lucene.
Dennis Gearon
Signature Warning
----------------
It is always a good idea to learn from your own mistakes. It is usually a
better idea to learn from others’ mistakes, so you do not have to make them
yourself. from 'http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4501&tag=nl.e036'
EARTH has a Right To Life,
otherwise we all die.
--- On Sun, 10/10/10, Otis Gospodnetic <otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> From: Otis Gospodnetic <otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Records from DIH not easily queried for
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Date: Sunday, October 10, 2010, 8:47 PM
> Dennis,
>
> The unique field does not have to be named "id".
> Fields are specified in schema.xml. There is no
> config.xml, although there is
> solrconfig.xml.
> If a query is returning fields that you do not have defined
> in schema.xml, it's
> time to stop working on weekends! ;) Seriously,
> though, that cannot be
> happening. Maybe you can show the relevant part of
> your schema file, your
> response, and your request?
>
>
> Otis----
> Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch
> Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Dennis Gearon <gear...@sbcglobal.net>
> > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Sent: Sun, October 10, 2010 8:47:29 PM
> > Subject: Re: Records from DIH not easily queried for
> >
> > Thanks for answering on a Sunday :-)
> >
> > What happens if the query returns extra fields
> that are not specified in the
> >config.xml?
> >
> > And does the unque field have to be named 'id'?
> >
> > Dennis Gearon
> >
> > Signature Warning
> > ----------------
> > It is always a good idea to learn from your own
> mistakes. It is usually a
> >better idea to learn from others’ mistakes, so you
> do not have to make them
> >yourself. from
> >'http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4501&tag=nl.e036'
> >
> > EARTH has a Right To Life,
> > otherwise we all die.
> >
> >
> > --- On Sun, 10/10/10, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com>
> > > Subject: Re: Records from DIH not easily
> queried for
> > > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> > > Date: Sunday, October 10, 2010, 8:11 AM
> > > The phrase that jumps out is "with
> > > fields slightly modified". I'm
> > > guessing that your modifications are off by
> a little.
> > > Here's what
> > > I'd check first:
> > > 1> check the case. Sometimes the DB <->
> field link
> > > is case
> > > sensitive.
> > > 2> Look in your index via the admin page
> and look at
> > > your actual
> > > fields as reported there. Are they really
> what you expect?
> > > 3> Try your query with
> &debugQuery=on. Is what you
> > > get back
> > > what you expect?
> > > 4> Sometimes your browser cache will fool you,
> try the
> > > force-refresh
> > > combination on your browser.
> > >
> > > There's no magic here, nothing special or
> different about
> > > DIH
> > > imported data than any other sort. So it's
> almost
> > > certainly
> > > some innocent-seeming change that's not,
> typo, incorrect
> > > assumption, etc.
> > >
> > > If none of that works, you need to post your
> schema changes
> > > and
> > > your query results (with
> &debugQuery=on). Particularly,
> > > post
> > > the fieldType definitions as well as your
> field
> > > definitions...
> > >
> > > Best
> > > Erick
> > >
> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Dennis Gearon
> <gear...@sbcglobal.net>wrote:
> > >
> > > > With a brand new setup, per the
> demo/tutorial, with
> > > fields slightly changed
> > > > in the config and data, posting XML
> records results in
> > > a simple qiery being
> > > > able to find records.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > But records imported via a plain jane
> DIH request can
> > > only be found using
> > > > 'q=*:*' queries.
> > > >
> > > > There's no filtering, tokenizing, blah
> blah. It's the
> > > factory settings. The
> > > > installation is as new at this as we
> are :-)
> > > >
> > > > Anyone have any ideas why we can't
> query for DIH
> > > handled records? Do they
> > > > have some magic juju done to them that
> XML Posts
> > > don't, or visa versa?
> > > >
> > > > Dennis Gearon
> > > >
> > > > Signature Warning
> > > > ----------------
> > > > It is always a good idea to learn from
> your own
> > > mistakes. It is usually a
> > > > better idea to learn from others’
> mistakes, so you
> > > do not have to make them
> > > > yourself. from '
> > > > http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4501&tag=nl.e036'
> > > >
> > > > EARTH has a Right To Life,
> > > > otherwise we all die.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
