Re: replications issue
wha is the problem. Is the replication not happening after you do a
commit on the master?
frequent polling is not a problem. frequent commits can slow down the system
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 2:41 PM, giskard wrote:
> Ciao,
>
> Uhm after some time a new index in data/index on the slave has been written
> with the ~size of the master index.
>
> the configure on both master slave is the same one on the solrReplication
> wiki page
> "enable/disable master/slave in a node"
>
>
>
> ${enable.master:false}
> commit
> schema.xml,stopwords.txt
>
>
> ${enable.slave:false}
> http://localhost:8983/solr/replication
> 00:00:60
>
>
>
> When the master is started, pass in -Denable.master=true and in the slave
> pass in -Denable.slave=true. Alternately , these values can be stored in a
> solrcore.properties file as follows
>
> #solrcore.properties in master
> enable.master=true
> enable.slave=false
>
> Il giorno 19/feb/2010, alle ore 03.43, Otis Gospodnetic ha scritto:
>
>> giskard,
>>
>> Is this on the master or on the slave(s)?
>> Maybe you can paste your replication handler config for the master and your
>> replication handler config for the slave.
>>
>> Otis
>>
>> Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch
>> Hadoop ecosystem search :: http://search-hadoop.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: giskard
>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Sent: Thu, February 18, 2010 12:16:37 PM
>> Subject: replications issue
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've setup solr replication as described in the wiki.
>>
>> when i start the replication a directory called index.$numebers is created
>> after a while
>> it disappears and a new index.$othernumbers is created
>>
>> index/ remains untouched with an empty index.
>>
>> any clue?
>>
>> thank you in advance,
>> Riccardo
>>
>> --
>> ciao,
>> giskard
>
> --
> ciao,
> giskard
>
>
>
>
--
-
Noble Paul | Systems Architect| AOL | http://aol.com
Re: spellcheck.build=true has no effect
On Feb 18, 2010, at 7:45 PM, darniz wrote: > > Hello All. > After doing a lot of research i came to this conclusion please correct me if > i am wrong. > i noticed that if you have buildonCommit and buildOnOptimize as true in your > spell check component, then the spell check builds whenever a commit or > optimze happens. which is the desired behaviour and correct. > please read on. > > I am using Index based spell checker and i am copying make and model to my > spellcheck field. i index some document and the make and model are being > copied to spellcheck field when i commit. > Now i stopped my solr server and > I added one more filed bodytype to be copied to my spellcheck field. > i dont want to reindex data so i issued a http request to rebuild my > spellchecker > &spellcheck=true&spellcheck.build=true&spellcheck.dictionary=default. > Looks like the above command has no effect, the bodyType is not being copied > to spellcheck field. > > The only time the spellcheck filed has bodyType value copied into it is when > i have to do again reindex document and do a commmit. > > Is this the desired behaviour. > Adding buildOncommit and buildOnOptimize will force the spellchecker to > rebuild only if a commit or optimize happens > Please let me know if there are some configurable parameters If you didn't re-index, the data from bodyType will not exist in your spellcheck field, so it won't be built into the spellchecking. That is working as expected, I believe.
Re: highlighting fragments EMPTY
> well ok I guess that makes sense and I tried changing my > title field to text > type and then highlighting worked on it .. but > 1) as far as not merging all fields in catchall field and > instead > configuring the dismax handler to search through them .. do > you mean then > ill have to specify the field I want to do the search in .. > e.g. > q=something&hl.fl=title or > q=somethingelse&hl.fl=status .. and another thing > is that I have abuot 20 some fields which I am merging in > my catch all > fields .. with that many fields do you still think its > better to use dismax > or catchall field ??? You can use your previous default hl.fl definition in schema.xml. Using dismax is more convenient because with catch all field approach you are indexing twice same data. Also with dismax you can specify separate boost factors to each field. > 2) secondly for highlighting q=title:searchterm also didnt > worked .. it only > works if I change the type of title field to text instead > of string .. even > if I give the full string in q param .. it still doesnt > highlights it unless > like I said I change the field type to text ... so > why is that .. I just tested to search and highlight on my string field CATEGORY it works fine. select/?q=CATEGORY:SPOR&hl=true&hl.fl=CATEGORY SPOR You can highlight on string type field as long as they are stored and indexed. The only this is string type is not analyzed, indexed verbatim. > and if > thats just how it is and I have to change some of my fields > to text .. then > my question is that solr will analyze them first their own > field and then > copy them to the catchall field while doing the analysis > one more time .. > since catchall field is also text .. i guess this is just > more of a > understanding question Copy field definition discards source fields type. I mean it just copies raw text. Only destination field's type matters.
Re: Solr 1.5 in production
One piece of functionality that I need is the ability to index a spatial shape. I've begun implementing this for solr 1.4 using just the spatial capabilities in lucene with a custom update processor and query parser. At this point I'm only supporting rectangles and the shapes are being indexed as sets of spatial tiles. In solr 1.5, I believe the correct implementation would be as a field type with the new subfielding capabilities. Do you have any thoughts about the approach I'm taking? Asif On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote: > > On Feb 19, 2010, at 4:54 PM, Asif Rahman wrote: > > > What is the prevailing opinion on using solr 1.5 in a production > > environment? I know that many people were using 1.4 in production for a > > while before it became an official release. > > > > Specifically I'm interested in using some of the new spatial features. > > These aren't fully baked yet (still need some spatial filtering > capabilities which I'm getting close to done with, or close enough to submit > a patch anyway), but feedback would be welcome. The main risk, I suppose, > is that any new APIs could change. Other than that, the usually advice > applies: Test it out in your environment and see if it meets your needs. > On the spatial stuff, we'd definitely appreciate feedback on performance, > functionality, APIs, etc. > > -Grant -- Asif Rahman Lead Engineer - NewsCred a...@newscred.com http://platform.newscred.com
Re: @Field annotation support
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Pulkit Singhal wrote: > Ok then, is this the correct class to support the @Field annotation? > Because I have it on the path but its not working. > yes , it is the right class. But, what is not working? > org\apache\solr\solr-solrj\1.4.0\solr-solrj-1.4.0.jar/org\apache\solr\client\solrj\beans\Field.class > > 2010/2/18 Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ् : >> solrj jar >> >> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Pulkit Singhal >> wrote: >>> Hello All, >>> >>> When I use Maven or Eclipse to try and compile my bean which has the >>> @Field annotation as specified in http://wiki.apache.org/solr/Solrj >>> page ... the compiler doesn't find any class to support the >>> annotation. What jar should we use to bring in this custom Solr >>> annotation? >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> - >> Noble Paul | Systems Architect| AOL | http://aol.com >> > -- - Noble Paul | Systems Architect| AOL | http://aol.com
readOnly and concurrency performance problems
Hey there, I am experiencing concurrent performance problems in trunk. Does it open readers in readOnly mode? Thanks in advance -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/readOnly-and-concurrency-performance-problems-tp27670680p27670680.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: readOnly and concurrency performance problems
Yeah it does - I take it your not on windows? - Mark http://www.lucidimagination.com (mobile) On Feb 20, 2010, at 4:39 PM, Marc Sturlese wrote: Hey there, I am experiencing concurrent performance problems in trunk. Does it open readers in readOnly mode? Thanks in advance -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/readOnly-and-concurrency-performance-problems-tp27670680p27670680.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: readOnly and concurrency performance problems
No, I am under debian. Actually I posted yesterday more exacly about the concurrency problem I have noticed: http://old.nabble.com/Strange-performance-behaviour-when-concurrent-requests-are-done-td27659695.html Do you know if is there any blocking thing in lucene 2.9.1 in the index readers or something?I am quite lost and surprised about the behaviour I have noticed... markrmiller wrote: > > Yeah it does - I take it your not on windows? > > - Mark > > http://www.lucidimagination.com (mobile) > > On Feb 20, 2010, at 4:39 PM, Marc Sturlese > wrote: > >> >> Hey there, I am experiencing concurrent performance problems in >> trunk. Does >> it open readers in readOnly mode? >> Thanks in advance >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://old.nabble.com/readOnly-and-concurrency-performance-problems-tp27670680p27670680.html >> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/readOnly-and-concurrency-performance-problems-tp27670680p27670915.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Why synchronized access to FieldValueCache in getUninvertedField.java
I have noticed that in the class UninvertedField.java there is a synchronized access to the FieldValueCache. I would like to know why this access is synchronized. Could this end up in a loss of performance when there are concurrent search requests? I am doing as much research as I can as I have noticed a performance loss when concurrent search happens. I described it with detail in another thread: http://old.nabble.com/Strange-performance-behaviour-when-concurrent-requests-are-done-td27659695.html -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Why-synchronized-access-to-FieldValueCache-in-getUninvertedField.java-tp27672399p27672399.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
