[ANNOUNCE] Luke 7.4.0 released
Download the release zip from here: https://github.com/DmitryKey/luke/releases/tag/luke-7.4.0 This update is for upgrading Lucene 7.4.0. Note: If you use OpenJDK you need to install OpenJFX separately to run JavaFX. Oracle HotSpot JVM includes JavaFX runtime. Best, Tomoko Uchida
Re: Solr Suggest Component and OOM
Has anyone ever been successful in processing 150M records using the
Suggester Component? The make of the component, please comment.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 1:37 AM, Ratnadeep Rakshit
wrote:
> The site_address field has all the address of United states. Idea is to
> build something similar to Google Places autosuggest.
>
> Here's an example query: curl "http://localhost/solr/
> addressbook/suggest?suggest.q=1054%20club&wt=json"
>
> Response:
>
> {
> "responseHeader": {
> "status": 0,
> "QTime": 3125,
> "params": {
> "suggest.q": "1054 club",
> "wt": "json"
> }
> },
> "suggest": {
> "mySuggester2": {
> "1054 club": {
> "numFound": 3,
> "suggestions": [{
> "term": "1054 null N COUNTRY CLUB null BLVD null STOCKTON CA
> 95204 5008",
> "weight": 0,
> "payload": "0023865882|06077|37.970769,-121.310433"
> }, {
> "term": "1054 null E HERITAGE CLUB null CIR null DELRAY
> BEACH FL 33483 3482",
> "weight": 0,
> "payload": "0117190535|12099|26.445485,-80.069336"
> }, {
> "term": "1054 null null CORAL CLUB null DR 1054 CORAL
> SPRINGS FL 33071 5657",
> "weight": 0,
> "payload": "0111342342|12011|26.243918,-80.267577"
> }]
> }
> },
> "mySuggester1": {
> "1054 club": {
> "numFound": 0,
> "suggestions": []
> }
> }
> }
> }
>
> Now when I start building with 25M address records in the addressbook
> core, the process runs smoothly. I can check the Heap utilization upto 56%
> max out of the 20GB allotted to Solr.
> I am not very experienced in metering solr performance. But it looks like
> when I increase the record size beyond 25M in the core, the build process
> fails. The query process of the suggester still works.
>
> Did that answer your questions correctly?
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 3:17 PM, Alessandro Benedetti <
> a.benede...@sease.io> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> first of all the two different suggesters you are using are based on
>> different data structures ( with different memory utilisation) :
>>
>> - FuzzyLookupFactory -> FST ( in memory and stored binary on disk)
>> - AnalyzingInfixLookupFactory -> Auxiliary Lucene Index
>>
>> Both the data structures should be very memory efficient ( both in
>> building
>> and storage).
>> What is the cardinality of the fields you are building suggestions from ?
>> (
>> site_address and site_address_other)
>> What is the memory situation in Solr when you start the suggester
>> building ?
>> You are allocating much more memory to the JVM Solr process than the OS (
>> which in your situation doesn't fit the entire index ideal scenario).
>>
>> I would recommend to put some monitoring in place ( there are plenty of
>> open
>> source tools to do that)
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> ---
>> Alessandro Benedetti
>> Search Consultant, R&D Software Engineer, Director
>> Sease Ltd. - www.sease.io
>> --
>> Sent from: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-User-f472068.html
>>
>
>
Re: Solr Default query parser
Thanks Jason and Shawn. It's clear now. Regards Kamal On Tue, Jun 26, 2018, 6:12 PM Jason Gerlowski wrote: > The "Standard Query Parser" _is_ the lucene query parser. They're the > same parser. As Shawn pointed out above, they're also the default, so > if you don't specify any defType, they will be used. Though if you > want to be explicit and specify it anyway, the value is defType=lucene > > Jason > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 1:05 PM Kamal Kishore Aggarwal > wrote: > > > > Hi Shawn, > > > > Thanks for the reply. > > > > If "lucene" is the default query parser, then how can we specify Standard > > Query Parser(QP) in the query. > > > > Dismax QP can be specified by defType=dismax and Extended Dismax Qp by > > defType=edismax, how about for declaration of Standard QP. > > > > Regards > > Kamal > > > > On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 9:41 PM, Shawn Heisey > wrote: > > > > > On 6/6/2018 9:52 AM, Kamal Kishore Aggarwal wrote: > > > >> What is the default query parser (QP) for solr. > > > >> > > > >> While I was reading about this, I came across two links which looks > > > >> ambiguous to me. It's not clear to me whether Standard is the > default > > > QP or > > > >> Lucene is the default QP or they are same. Below is the screenshot > and > > > >> links which are confusing me. > > > > > > The default query parser in Solr has the name "lucene". This query > > > parser, which is part of Solr, deals with Lucene query syntax. > > > > > > The most recent documentation states this clearly right after the table > > > of contents: > > > > > > > https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_3/the-standard-query-parser.html > > > > > > It is highly unlikely that the 6.6 documentation will receive any > > > changes, unless serious errors are found in it. The omission of this > > > piece of information will not be seen as a serious error. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Shawn > > > > > > >
Re: A user defined request handler is failing to fetch the data.
@Erick Erickson Thanks for the response. Yes am going to have the shards on 6 different servers which will be later called in my searchHandler by specifying the shards list. But for that initially i was testing the filesearch with the single shard which was suppose to work. I know solr could does handle these thing more better than but for now i need to use the master/slave architecture with distributed node in front of them. As of now if in the solrconfig.xml if i keep lucenematchversion to 6.6.3 then only . am seeing the error which i posted earlier if switch the version back to LUCENE_40 it just works fine. But is it not suppose to work with 6.6.3 am confused there. And also the logs which i pasted in from solr.log not from the client side. Thanks -- Sent from: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-User-f472068.html
