Hoss,
I had a feeling someone would be quoting Yonik's Law of Patches! ;-)
For now, this is done.
I created the changes, created JavaDoc comments on the various settings
and their expected output, created a JUnit test for the
SpellCheckerRequestHandler
which tests various components of the ha
On 10/10/07, Mike Klaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have you tried setting multivalued=true without reindexing? I'm not
> sure, but I think it will work.
Yes, that will work fine.
One thing that will change is the response format for stored fields
val1
instead of
val1
Hopefully in the future we
Awesome! Thanks!
hossman wrote:
>
>
> : looking queries that I'm not quite sure how to specify in my
> solrconfig.xml
> : file in the newSearcher section.
>
> :
> rows=20&start=0&facet.query=attribute_id:1003278&facet.query=attribute_id:1003928&sort=merchant_count+desc&facet=true&facet.field=
: looking queries that I'm not quite sure how to specify in my solrconfig.xml
: file in the newSearcher section.
:
rows=20&start=0&facet.query=attribute_id:1003278&facet.query=attribute_id:1003928&sort=merchant_count+desc&facet=true&facet.field=min_price_cad_rounded_to_tens&facet.field=manufactu
Hi,
The examples that I've found in the solrconfig.xml file and on this site are
fairly basic for pre-warming specific queries. I have some rather complex
looking queries that I'm not quite sure how to specify in my solrconfig.xml
file in the newSearcher section.
Here's an example of 3 queries t
: Around Sept. 20 I started getting Japanese spam to this account. This is
: a special account I only use for the Solr and Lucene user mailing
: lists. Did anybody else get these, starting around 9/20?
Note that many mailing list archives leave the sender emails in plain text
(which results in
On 10-Oct-07, at 3:46 PM, David Whalen wrote:
I'll see what I can do about that.
Truthfully, the most important facet we need is the one on
media_type, which has only 4 unique values. The second
most important one to us is location, which has about 30
unique values.
So, it would seem like we
I'll see what I can do about that.
Truthfully, the most important facet we need is the one on
media_type, which has only 4 unique values. The second
most important one to us is location, which has about 30
unique values.
So, it would seem like we actually need a counter-intuitive
solution. That
the default solrj implementation should do what you need.
As for Solrj, you're probably right, but I'm not going to take any
chances for the time being. The server.add method has an optional
Boolean flag named "overwrite" that defaults to true. Without knowing
for sure what it does, I'm not goi
On 10-Oct-07, at 2:40 PM, David Whalen wrote:
Accoriding to Yonik I can't use minDf because I'm faceting
on a string field. I'm thinking of changing it to a tokenized
type so that I can utilize this setting, but then I'll have to
rebuild my entire index.
Unless there's some way around that?
Hello,
We're using solr 1.2 and a nightly build of the solrj client code. We very
occasionally see things like this:
org.apache.solr.client.solrj.SolrServerException: Error executing query
at org.apache.solr.client.solrj.request.QueryRequest.process(
QueryRequest.java:86)
at org.
I've re-written the code to generate separate files. One for adds and one for
deletes. And this is working well for us now. Thanks.
Mike Klaas wrote:
>
>
> This would be very complicated from a standpoint of returning errors
> to the client.
>
> Keep in mind the can never be batched, rega
On Wednesday 10 October 2007 12:00, Martin Grotzke wrote:
> Basically I see two options: stemming and the usage of synonyms. Are
> there others?
A large list of German words and their forms is available from a Windows
software called Morphy
(http://www.wolfganglezius.de/doku.php?id=public:cl:mo
Accoriding to Yonik I can't use minDf because I'm faceting
on a string field. I'm thinking of changing it to a tokenized
type so that I can utilize this setting, but then I'll have to
rebuild my entire index.
Unless there's some way around that?
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Kla
Thanks for the response, Mike. A quick test using the example app
confirms your statement.
As for Solrj, you're probably right, but I'm not going to take any
chances for the time being. The server.add method has an optional
Boolean flag named "overwrite" that defaults to true. Without knowing
for
On 10-Oct-07, at 12:49 PM, BrendanD wrote:
We simply process a queue of updates from a database table. Some of
the
updates are deletes, some are adds. Sometimes you can have many
deletes in a
row, sometimes many adds in a row, and sometimes a mixture of
deletes and
adds. We're trying to b
On 10-Oct-07, at 1:11 PM, Charlie Jackson wrote:
Anyway, I need to update some docs in my index because my client
program
wasn't accurately putting these docs in (values for one of the fields
was missing). I'm hoping I won't have to write additional code to go
through and delete each existing
On 10-Oct-07, at 12:19 PM, David Whalen wrote:
It looks now like I can't use facets the way I was hoping
to because the memory requirements are impractical.
I can't remember if this has been mentioned, but upping the
HashDocSet size is one way to reduce memory consumption. Whether
this wi
Normally this is the type of thing I'd just scour through the online
docs or the source code for, but I'm under the gun a bit.
Anyway, I need to update some docs in my index because my client program
wasn't accurately putting these docs in (values for one of the fields
was missing). I'm hoping
Hi Felipe -
The issue you're encountering is a problem with the data format being passed
to the solr server. If you follow the stack trace that you posted, you'll
notice that the solr field is looking for a value that's a float, but the
passed value is "1,234".
I'm guessing this is caused by one
We simply process a queue of updates from a database table. Some of the
updates are deletes, some are adds. Sometimes you can have many deletes in a
row, sometimes many adds in a row, and sometimes a mixture of deletes and
adds. We're trying to batch our updates and were hoping to avoid having to
: Does anyone know how to correct this? Is it not possible to have multiple
: different top-level tags in the same update xml file? It seems to me like it
: should work, but perhaps there's something inherently bad about this from
: the XMLStreamReader's point of view.
it's inherently bad from th
Hi,
I've got an xml update document that I'm sending to solr's update handler
with deletes and adds in it. For example:
12345678
And I'm getting the following exception in the catalina.out log:
Oct 10, 2007 12:58:22 PM org.apache.solr.common.SolrException log
SEVERE: javax.xml.stream.
It looks now like I can't use facets the way I was hoping
to because the memory requirements are impractical.
So, as an alternative I was thinking I could get counts
by doing rows=0 and using filter queries.
Is there a reason to think that this might perform better?
Or, am I simply moving the p
Hello,
I am trying to run SolrSharp's example application but am getting a
WebException with a ServerProtocolViolation status message.
After some debugging I found out this is happening with a call to:
http://localhost:8080/solr/update/
And using fiddler[1] found out that solr is actually throwi
Hello,
I am trying to run SolrSharp's example application but am getting a
WebException with a ServerProtocolViolation status message.
After some debugging I found out this is happening with a call to:
http://localhost:8080/solr/update/
And using fiddler[1] found out that solr is actually throwi
: I think search for "*:*" is the optimal code to do it. I don't think you can
: do anything faster.
FYI: getting the data from the xml returned by stats.jsp is definitely
faster in the case where you really want all docs.
if you want the total number from some other query however, don't "count
: there a fast & easy way to retrieve this number (instead of searching for
: "*:*" and counting the results)?
NOTE: you don't have to count the results to know the total number of
docs matching any query ... just use the numFound attribute of the
block.
: I already took a look at the stats.j
i'm not very familiar with that wiki, but note the line in the example ant
script...
...
: --solr.xml <-- Where i can find this file?
according to the wiki page...
> First we will setup a basic directory structure (assuming we only want to
> change some fields) and copy the attached buil
I think search for "*:*" is the optimal code to do it. I don't think you can
do anything faster.
On 10/11/07, Stefan Rinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> for some tests I need to know how many documents are stored in the
> index - is there a fast & easy way to retrieve this number (instead
Hi
for some tests I need to know how many documents are stored in the
index - is there a fast & easy way to retrieve this number (instead
of searching for "*:*" and counting the results)?
I already took a look at the stats.jsp code - but there the number of
documents is retrieved via an api
Hi,
- Original Message
From: David Whalen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On that note -- I've read that Jetty isn't the best servlet
container to use in these situations, is that your experience?
OG: In which situations? Jetty is great, actually! (the pretty high traffic
site in my sig runs Jett
Hmmm, by the looks of your query, it doesn't seem like it is a Solr
query, but I admit I don't have all the parameters memorized. What
request handler, etc. are you using? Have you tried debugging?
And you say you have tried a query with the Solr Admin query page,
right? And that works?
In firefox, character encoding is set to UTF-8
Yes, I'm sending the query directly to solr using apache httpclient and
I set the http request header content type to : Content-Type="text/html;
charset=UTF-8"
Any suggestions
Thanks in advance
-Original Message-
From: Grant Ingersoll [mailt
Can you give more detail about what you have done? What character
encoding do you have your browser set to? In Firefox, do View ->
Character Encoding to see what it is set to when you are on the input
page? Internet Explorer and other browsers have other options. Are
you sending the que
Hi Piete,
Good idea. Thanks. One other change that should probably be made is to
change the package statement from org.oclc.solr.analysis to
org.apache.solr.analysis. Thanks again.
Cheers!
harry
-Original Message-
From: Pieter Berkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 09,
First of all, I just wanted to say that I just started working with Solr and
really like the results I'm getting from Solr (in terms of performance,
flexibility) as well as the good responses I'm getting from this group.
Hopefully I will be able to contribute in way way or another to this
wonderfu
in short: use stemming
Try the SnowballPorterFilterFactory with German2 as language attribute
first and use synonyms for combined words i.e. "Herrenhose" => "Herren",
"Hose".
By using stemming you will maybe have some "interesting" results, but it
is much better living with them than having
Hello,
with our application we have the issue, that we get different
results for singular and plural searches (german language).
E.g. for "hose" we get 1.000 documents back, but for "hosen"
we get 10.000 docs. The same applies to "t-shirt" or "t-shirts",
of e.g. "hut" and "hüte" - lots of cases :
i would be interested to know in both the cases :
Case 1 :
* document "1", with uniq ID "ui1" will be indexed in the "indexA"
* document "2", with uniq ID "ui2" will be indexed in the "indexB"
* document "3", with uniq ID "ui3" will be indexed in the "indexA"
Case 2 :
* document "1", with uniq ID
Sorry, there's a mistake in my previous example.
Please read this:
* document "1", with uniq ID "ui1" will be indexed in the "indexA"
* document "2", with uniq ID "ui2" will be indexed in the "indexB"
* document "3", with uniq ID "ui3" will be indexed in the "indexA"
Thanks
cheers
Y.
Messa
Hi guys !
Is it possible to configure Solr to manage different indexes depending on the
added documents ?
For example:
* document "1", with uniq ID "ui1" will be indexed in the "indexA"
* document "2", with uniq ID "ui2" will be indexed in the "indexB"
* document "3", with uniq ID "ui1" will be
Hi *,
I use solr as embedded solution.
I have set unlockOnStartup to "true" in my solrconfig.xml
But it seems, that this option is ignored by embedded solr.
Any ideas?
Thanks in advance,
Alexey
Hi Solr-Users,
i try to follow the instructions [1] from the solr-wiki
to build my custom solr server.
First i have created the directory-structure.
mySolr
--solr
--conf
--schema.xml
--solrconfig.xml
--solr.xml <-- Where i can find this file?
--build.xml <-- copy & paste from the wiki
I'm developing a java application using solr, this application is
working with English search
Yes, I have tried querying solr directly for Arabic and it's working
Any suggestions ??
-Original Message-
From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 5:50
45 matches
Mail list logo
