I should say I'm running: Solr Specification Version: 4.0.0.2010.12.10.08.54.56 and by the looks of the version number I'm running something from Dec 12 of last year.
Tomas: geofilt and geodist() are supported in 3.3? Along with the location and point type? Quite frankly, 1.3/1.4, 3.3, 4.0 all confuse me. I just had our operations personnel install versions until I got the needed functionality. -----Original Message----- From: Tomás Fernández Löbbe [mailto:tomasflo...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 5:12 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: 'Stable' 4.0 version As far as I know, Solr's trunk is pretty stable, so you shoundl't have many problems with it if you test it correctly. Lucid's search platform is built upon the trunk ( http://www.lucidimagination.com/products/lucidworks-search-platform/enterprise ). The one thing I would be concerned is with the index format. It might change in an incompatible way from one revision to the next one, so if rebuilding your index is complicated or takes too long this can be a problem. If your version election is based on the geospatial stuff, why don't you use Solr 3.3 release? It already contains those features. Tomás On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Jaeger, Jay - DOT <jay.jae...@dot.wi.gov>wrote: > > geospatial requirements > > Looking at your email address, no surprise there. 8^) > > > What insight can you share (if any) regarding moving forward to a > > later > nightly build? > > I used build 1271 (Solr 1.4.1, which seemed to be called Solr 4 at the > time) during some testing, and it performed well -- but we were not > doing geospatial indexing with Solr. Or are you referring to the > successor to Solr 3.3 at some future point in time (which I supposed > might also be called Solr 4 in the future -- won't that be confusing!) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Herman Kiefus [mailto:herm...@angieslist.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 2:55 PM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: 'Stable' 4.0 version > > My origination uses Solr 4 because of our geospatial requirements. > What insight can you share (if any) regarding moving forward to a > later nightly build? Or, for those of you using 4.0 in a Production > setting, when is it that you move ahead? >
