Facet Query using Dates
Hi, I;m having issues using the "new" way of faceting dates with the Query
Facets.
The issue is that it is returning wrong counts. I tested it using a Date Facet
instead and the Dated one did result correct counters. I'm using Sunspot RSolr
client and I'm using also new folding/group feature.
This is my query tested against the Solr admin web interface:
/select?wt=ruby&fq=type:Movie&fq=event_id_i:[1%20TO%20*]&sort=location_weight_i%20desc&q="Actividad%20paranormal%203"&fl=*%20score&qf=name_texts%20location_name_text&defType=dismax&start=0&rows=12&group=true&group.field=event_id_str_s&group.field=location_name_str_s&group.sort=date_start_dt%20asc&group.limit=10&group.limit=1&facet=true&f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.mincount=1&facet.date=date_start_facet_dt&f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.start=2012-01-10T09:44:22Z&f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.end=2012-01-11T08:59:59Z&f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.gap=%2B86400SECONDS&facet.query=-date_start_facet_dt:[2012\-01\-10T09\:44\:22Z%20TO%202012\-01\-11T08\:59\:59Z]
The important parts here are:
The Query Facet
facet.query=-date_start_facet_dt:[2012\-01\-10T09\:44\:22Z TO
2012\-01\-11T08\:59\:59Z]
The Date Facet
f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.mincount=1
facet.date=date_start_facet_dt
f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.start=2012-01-10T09:44:22Z
f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.end=2012-01-11T08:59:59Z
f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.gap=%2B86400SECONDS
As you can see both facets have the same "range"
Now the important part of the results:
'facet_counts'=>{
'facet_queries'=>{
'-date_start_facet_dt:[2012\\-01\\-10T09\\:44\\:22Z TO
2012\\-01\\-11T08\\:59\\:59Z]' => 26},
'facet_fields'=>{},
'facet_dates'=> {
'date_start_facet_dt'=>{
'2012-01-10T09:44:22Z'=>4,
'gap'=>'+86400SECONDS',
'start'=>'2012-01-10T09:44:22Z',
'end'=>'2012-01-11T09:44:22Z'}}
,'facet_ranges'=>{}}}
As you can see for the same ranges I'm getting different counts. The CORRECT
one is the facet_dates ones.
BTW I'm using Solr Implementation Version: 3.5.0 1204988 - simon - 2011-11-22
14:54:38
Is this a KNOW BUG? Please Help! :D
--
Mauro Asprea
E-Mail: mauroasp...@gmail.com
Mobile: +34 654297582
Skype: mauro.asprea
Re: Facet Query using Dates
I think I solve it... It seems to be because of the - that's just before the
query facet name
--
Mauro Asprea
E-Mail: mauroasp...@gmail.com
Mobile: +34 654297582
Skype: mauro.asprea
On Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Mauro Asprea wrote:
> Hi, I;m having issues using the "new" way of faceting dates with the Query
> Facets.
>
> The issue is that it is returning wrong counts. I tested it using a Date
> Facet instead and the Dated one did result correct counters. I'm using
> Sunspot RSolr client and I'm using also new folding/group feature.
>
> This is my query tested against the Solr admin web interface:
>
> /select?wt=ruby&fq=type:Movie&fq=event_id_i:[1%20TO%20*]&sort=location_weight_i%20desc&q="Actividad%20paranormal%203"&fl=*%20score&qf=name_texts%20location_name_text&defType=dismax&start=0&rows=12&group=true&group.field=event_id_str_s&group.field=location_name_str_s&group.sort=date_start_dt%20asc&group.limit=10&group.limit=1&facet=true&f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.mincount=1&facet.date=date_start_facet_dt&f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.start=2012-01-10T09:44:22Z&f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.end=2012-01-11T08:59:59Z&f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.gap=%2B86400SECONDS&facet.query=-date_start_facet_dt:[2012\-01\-10T09\:44\:22Z%20TO%202012\-01\-11T08\:59\:59Z]
>
> The important parts here are:
>
> The Query Facet
> facet.query=-date_start_facet_dt:[2012\-01\-10T09\:44\:22Z TO
> 2012\-01\-11T08\:59\:59Z]
>
>
> The Date Facet
> f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.mincount=1
> facet.date=date_start_facet_dt
> f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.start=2012-01-10T09:44:22Z
> f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.end=2012-01-11T08:59:59Z
> f.date_start_facet_dt.facet.date.gap=%2B86400SECONDS
>
> As you can see both facets have the same "range"
>
> Now the important part of the results:
> 'facet_counts'=>{
> 'facet_queries'=>{
> '-date_start_facet_dt:[2012\\-01\\-10T09\\:44\\:22Z TO
> 2012\\-01\\-11T08\\:59\\:59Z]' => 26},
> 'facet_fields'=>{},
> 'facet_dates'=> {
> 'date_start_facet_dt'=>{
> '2012-01-10T09:44:22Z'=>4,
> 'gap'=>'+86400SECONDS',
> 'start'=>'2012-01-10T09:44:22Z',
> 'end'=>'2012-01-11T09:44:22Z'}}
> ,'facet_ranges'=>{}}}
>
>
> As you can see for the same ranges I'm getting different counts. The CORRECT
> one is the facet_dates ones.
>
> BTW I'm using Solr Implementation Version: 3.5.0 1204988 - simon - 2011-11-22
> 14:54:38
>
> Is this a KNOW BUG? Please Help! :D
>
> --
> Mauro Asprea
>
> E-Mail: mauroasp...@gmail.com (mailto:mauroasp...@gmail.com)
> Mobile: +34 654297582
> Skype: mauro.asprea
>
>
>
>
Multiple Sort for Group/Folding
Hi, I'm having some issues trying to sort my grouped results by more than one
field. If I use just one, independently of which I use it just work fine (I
mean it sorts).
I have a case that the first sorting key is equal for all the head docs of each
group, so I expect to return the groups sorted by its second sorting key. But
its not the case. Only sorts using the first key no matter what.
This is my query:
fq=type:Movie&fq={!tag=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-11T06\:47\:38Z TO
2012\-01\-12T08\:59\:59Z]&fq=event_id_i:[1 TO *]&sort=location_weight_i desc,
weight_i desc&q="Village Avellaneda"&fl=* score&qf=name_texts
location_name_text&defType=dismax&start=0&rows=12&group=true&group.field=event_id_str_s&group.field=location_name_str_s&group.sort=date_start_dt
asc&group.limit=10&group.limit=1&facet=true&facet.query={!ex=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-11T06\:47\:38Z
TO
2012\-01\-12T08\:59\:59Z]&facet.query={!ex=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-12T09\:00\:00Z
TO
2012\-01\-13T08\:59\:59Z]&facet.query={!ex=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-13T21\:00\:00Z
TO
2012\-01\-16T08\:59\:59Z]&facet.query={!ex=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-11T06\:47\:38Z
TO
2012\-01\-18T12\:47\:38Z]&facet.query={!ex=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-11T06\:47\:38Z
TO 2012\-02\-10T12\:47\:38Z]
Using the last Solr release 3.5
Thanks!
--
Mauro Asprea
E-Mail: mauroasp...@gmail.com
Mobile: +34 654297582
Skype: mauro.asprea
Re: Multiple Sort for Group/Folding
Thanks Martijn. I know what you mean, but in my case I want to sort the groups
using both "sort" keys and then inside each group it should use the
"group.sort".
If you take a look at the query you will see both regular sorting keys
&sort=location_weight_i desc, weight_i desc. The issue here is that when does
the grouping it is seems to be failingl to sort the groups by the second key.
to clarify: I do understand the use case for the other "group.sort" key and it
is working just fine. The issue is with the 2nd regular sort key.
Thanks ;)
--
Mauro Asprea
E-Mail: mauroasp...@gmail.com
Mobile: +34 654297582
Skype: mauro.asprea
On Wednesday, January 11, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Martijn v Groningen wrote:
> Hi Mauro,
>
> During the first pass search the sort param is used to determine the top N
> groups. Then during the second pass search the documents inside the top N
> groups are sorted using the group.sort parameter. The group.sort doesn't
> change how the groups them self are sorted.
>
> Martijn
>
> On 11 January 2012 08:03, Mauro Asprea (mailto:mauroasp...@gmail.com)> wrote:
>
> > Hi, I'm having some issues trying to sort my grouped results by more than
> > one field. If I use just one, independently of which I use it just work
> > fine (I mean it sorts).
> >
> > I have a case that the first sorting key is equal for all the head docs of
> > each group, so I expect to return the groups sorted by its second sorting
> > key. But its not the case. Only sorts using the first key no matter what.
> >
> > This is my query:
> > fq=type:Movie&fq={!tag=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-11T06\:47\:38Z
> > TO 2012\-01\-12T08\:59\:59Z]&fq=event_id_i:[1 TO *]&sort=location_weight_i
> > desc, weight_i desc&q="Village Avellaneda"&fl=* score&qf=name_texts
> > location_name_text&defType=dismax&start=0&rows=12&group=true&group.field=event_id_str_s&group.field=location_name_str_s&group.sort=date_start_dt
> > asc&group.limit=10&group.limit=1&facet=true&facet.query={!ex=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-11T06\:47\:38Z
> > TO
> > 2012\-01\-12T08\:59\:59Z]&facet.query={!ex=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-12T09\:00\:00Z
> > TO
> > 2012\-01\-13T08\:59\:59Z]&facet.query={!ex=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-13T21\:00\:00Z
> > TO
> > 2012\-01\-16T08\:59\:59Z]&facet.query={!ex=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-11T06\:47\:38Z
> > TO
> > 2012\-01\-18T12\:47\:38Z]&facet.query={!ex=cg01w4p3bcj3}date_start_dt:[2012\-01\-11T06\:47\:38Z
> > TO 2012\-02\-10T12\:47\:38Z]
> >
> > Using the last Solr release 3.5
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> > --
> > Mauro Asprea
> >
> > E-Mail: mauroasp...@gmail.com (mailto:mauroasp...@gmail.com)
> > Mobile: +34 654297582
> > Skype: mauro.asprea
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
> Martijn van Groningen
Re: Concurrent query execution and Solr
I would want to know about this too — Mauro Asprea E-Mail: mauroasp...@gmail.com Mobile: +34 654 297 582 > El 14 jul 2020, a las 18:33, André Widhani escribió: > > Hi, > > Does anybody know if work is in progress to make Lucene's concurrent query > execution accessible through Solr? I am talking about this: > http://blog.mikemccandless.com/2019/10/concurrent-query-execution-in-apache.html > > I find this compelling in particular since the changes in LUCENE-7976 / > Solr 7.5 where, even after an optimize, you end up with a number of almost > equally sized segments. And for those who would go to Solr Cloud for > parallel query execution only because they have other means of redundancy > in place, this is a nice way to avoid additional complexity with ZooKeeper. > > Thanks, > André
Re: Solr with HDFS configuration example running in production/dev
; org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.ReservedThreadExecutor$ReservedThread.run(ReservedThreadExecutor.java:388) > at > > org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool.runJob(QueuedThreadPool.java:806) > at > > org.eclipse.jetty.util.thread.QueuedThreadPool$Runner.run(QueuedThreadPool.java:938) > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748) > Caused by: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Unable to create core > [newcollsolr2_shard1_replica_n1] > at > > org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.createFromDescriptor(CoreContainer.java:1327) > at org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.create(CoreContainer.java:1217) > ... 47 more > Caused by: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Illegal char <:> at index > 4: hdfs:// > > hn1-pjhado.tvbhpqtgh3judk1e5ihrx2k21d.tx.internal.cloudapp.net:8020/user/solr-data/newcollsolr2/core_node3/data\ > <http://hn1-pjhado.tvbhpqtgh3judk1e5ihrx2k21d.tx.internal.cloudapp.net:8020/user/solr-data/newcollsolr2/core_node3/data%5C> > at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.(SolrCore.java:1072) > at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.(SolrCore.java:901) > at > > org.apache.solr.core.CoreContainer.createFromDescriptor(CoreContainer.java:1306) > ... 48 more > Caused by: java.nio.file.InvalidPathException: Illegal char <:> at index 4: > hdfs:// > > hn1-pjhado.tvbhpqtgh3judk1e5ihrx2k21d.tx.internal.cloudapp.net:8020/user/solr-data/newcollsolr2/core_node3/data\ > <http://hn1-pjhado.tvbhpqtgh3judk1e5ihrx2k21d.tx.internal.cloudapp.net:8020/user/solr-data/newcollsolr2/core_node3/data%5C> > at sun.nio.fs.WindowsPathParser.normalize(WindowsPathParser.java:182) > at sun.nio.fs.WindowsPathParser.parse(WindowsPathParser.java:153) > at sun.nio.fs.WindowsPathParser.parse(WindowsPathParser.java:77) > at sun.nio.fs.WindowsPath.parse(WindowsPath.java:94) > at sun.nio.fs.WindowsFileSystem.getPath(WindowsFileSystem.java:255) > at sun.nio.fs.AbstractPath.resolve(AbstractPath.java:53) > at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.initUpdateLogDir(SolrCore.java:1380) > at org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore.(SolrCore.java:958) > ... 50 more > > Attaching it as a file too. Thanks! > > On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 9:37 PM Joe Obernberger < > joseph.obernber...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Your exception didn't come across - can you paste it in? > > > > -Joe > > > > On 8/19/2020 10:50 AM, Prashant Jyoti wrote: > > > You're right Andrew. Even I read about that. But there's a use case for > > > which we want to configure the said case. > > > > > > Are you also aware of what feature we are moving towards instead of > HDFS? > > > Will you be able to help me with the error that I'm running into? > > > > > > Thanks in advance! > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 19 Aug, 2020, 5:24 pm Andrew MacKay, < > andrew.mac...@superna.net> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I believe HDFS support is being deprecated in Solr. Not sure you want > > to > > >> continue configuration if support will disappear. > > >> > > >> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 7:52 AM Prashant Jyoti > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi all, > > >>> Hope you are healthy and safe. > > >>> > > >>> Need some help with HDFS configuration. > > >>> > > >>> Could anybody of you share an example of the configuration with which > > you > > >>> are running Solr with HDFS in any of your production/dev > environments? > > >>> I am interested in the parts of SolrConfig.xml / Solr.in.cmd/sh which > > you > > >>> may have modified. Obviously with the security parts obfuscated. > > >>> > > >>> I am stuck at an error and unable to move ahead. Attaching the > > exception > > >>> log if anyone is interested to look at the error. > > >>> > > >>> Thanks! > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Regards, > > >>> Prashant. > > >>> > > >> -- > > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this email is > > >> privileged and confidential and intended only for the use of the > > >> individual > > >> or entity to whom it is addressed. If you receive this message in > > error, > > >> please notify the sender immediately at 613-729-1100 and destroy the > > >> original message and all copies. Thank you. > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Prashant. > -- Mauro Asprea E-Mail: mauroasp...@gmail.com Mobile: +34 654297582 Keybase: https://keybase.io/brutuscat
