We can use a simple reflection based implementation to simplify
reading too many parameters.
What I wish to emphasize is that Solr should be agnostic of xml
altogether. It should only be aware of specific Objects and
interfaces. If users wish to plugin something else in some other way ,
it should
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 5:58 AM, Erik Hatcher wrote:
> It is strange that you get facet=false calls in there, but maybe this is
> just normal distributed search protocol in one of the phases?
Right, on the second phase of a distrib request, additional faceting
may not be needed.
But it looks lik
On 9/18/09 3:17 PM, "AHMET ARSLAN" wrote:
>> We have a document field with attributes indexed=true,
>> stored=true
>> (multiValued not explicitly set in schema.xml) and also use
>> the
>> SynonymFilterFactory as one of the index analyzer filters
>> for that field. I
>> examined (using Luke)
> I have a question regarding the usage of the
> SynonymFilterFactory at index
> time.
>
> We have a document field with attributes indexed=true,
> stored=true
> (multiValued not explicitly set in schema.xml) and also use
> the
> SynonymFilterFactory as one of the index analyzer filters
> for th
Free Webinar: Apache Lucene 2.9: Discover the Powerful New Features
---
Join us for a free and in-depth technical webinar with Grant
Ingersoll, co-founder of Lucid Imagination and chair of the Apache
Lucene PMC.
Thursday, Septe
Constant tf with idf can work well for very short fields, like titles. For
example, the movie "New York, New York" is not twice as much about New York
as movies that have the string in the title only once.
wudner
-Original Message-
From: Aaron McKee [mailto:ucbmc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Frid
Hi,
I have a question regarding the usage of the SynonymFilterFactory at index
time.
We have a document field with attributes indexed=true, stored=true
(multiValued not explicitly set in schema.xml) and also use the
SynonymFilterFactory as one of the index analyzer filters for that field. I
exa
Over the weekend I may write a patch to allow simple reflection based
injection from within solrconfig.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:10 AM, Yonik Seeley
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
> wrote:
>>> I was wondering if there is a way I can modify calibrateSizeByDeletes
Hello,
The company I work for is looking to hire a Sr. Software Engineer with
considerable experience using Solr. The project we are embarking on
is relatively new so the person we hire would have a lot of freedom to
help define the architecture for our e-commerce product and merchant
in
If the reason you're copying from member_of to member_of_facet is
because faceting isn't allowed on multi-valued fields, then that's no
longer true. See
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-475
which is in the trunk and which will be available in the 1.4 release.
If you're running an ea
Forgot to answer this one. Yes, I do have a warming query to get the
sort caches up to speed. I think it takes a while to run; my guess
would be 30 seconds or so.
2009/9/18 Grant Ingersoll :
>
> Also, do you have warming queries setup?
>
> On Sep 17, 2009, at 12:46 PM, Chris Harris wrote:
>
>> It
No, I'm pretty sure nothing implements SolrInfoMBean.
I applied the new 1K version of SOLR-1427.patch from
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1427
(which appears to be a secondary patch, to be applied once the main
SOLR-1427 patch has already been applied) to my problematic Solr
inst
Hi Yonik,
For my particular needs, IDF considerations are fine and helpful; if a
user is requesting a rare term/phrase, increasing the score based on
that makes sense as the match has higher confidence. I simply need to
compensate for title and category type fields that may contain redundant
Also, do you have any custom components or anything that implements
SolrInfoMBean?
On Sep 18, 2009, at 8:16 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
Can you try the patch I just put up on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1427
and let me know if it works when JMX is enabled?
Also, do you have w
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Aaron McKee wrote:
> I wonder, though, if it could also make sense to support a
> query-time only boolean to optionally disable TF independently, on a
> per-field basis?
I guess it could make sense. But do you still want idf too? length
norm? or do you really wa
Can you try the patch I just put up on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1427
and let me know if it works when JMX is enabled?
Also, do you have warming queries setup?
On Sep 17, 2009, at 12:46 PM, Chris Harris wrote:
It looks like this works as a fix for me as well. (I'm not curren
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
wrote:
>> I was wondering if there is a way I can modify calibrateSizeByDeletes just
>> by configuration ?
>>
>
> Alas, no. The only option that I see for you is to sub-class
> LogByteSizeMergePolicy and set calibrateSizeByDeletes to true in t
Hi Yonik,
Thank you for the explanation. If the primary goal was to save index
space for a very specific subclass of fields, the implementation
certainly makes more sense. I wonder, though, if it could also make
sense to support a query-time only boolean to optionally disable TF
independentl
ok, used the built in fieldtype text_ws that seems to go well
DHast wrote:
>
> i have looked, and seem to be running into a dead end every time i try it,
> but again it may be because of the caching and me not realizing it was
> doing it till my hair was half pulled.
>
> i dont suppose youd be
i have looked, and seem to be running into a dead end every time i try it,
but again it may be because of the caching and me not realizing it was doing
it till my hair was half pulled.
i dont suppose youd be willing to give a hint then?
Grant Ingersoll-6 wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 18, 2009, at 6:37
Though it would be possible to calculate a binary tf, where the score
is 1 if there are one or more occurances of the term. --wunder
On Sep 18, 2009, at 7:08 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Aaron McKee
wrote:
I suppose I'm curious why the omitTfAndPositions option
On Sep 18, 2009, at 2:45 AM, Rahul R wrote:
Hello,
A rather trivial question on omitNorms parameter in schema.xml. The
out-of-the-box schema.xml uses this parameter during both within
the tag and tag and If we define the omitNorms
during
the fieldType definition, will it hold good for all
On Sep 18, 2009, at 6:37 AM, DHast wrote:
when i have my fieldname: text set as a text field, advanced search
queries
work very well, but when i have it set as a string it seems to
ignore them,
like proximity searching and so on.
example: text as string:
text:"law order"~33
text:"law orde
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Aaron McKee wrote:
> I suppose I'm curious why the omitTfAndPositions option conflates two
> apparently independent features.
This relates to the index format, and is more for performance/size
benefits when they are not needed. In the index, it's impossible to
om
Hi Alexey,
Thank you for your suggestion! My understanding of Similarity, though,
is that this would affect the entire index, whereas I need something
that is field-configurable. Looking at Similarity.tf(), it seems to be
independent of the field (and unaware of it). I don't necessarily want
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Lee Theobald wrote:
> I also seem to be having a similar problem deleting. As far as I can tell,
> the system thinks we are deleting the records (it logs that it's executing
> the commands and all looks OK) but the records always remain. Regardsless
> if we try a
when i have my fieldname: text set as a text field, advanced search queries
work very well, but when i have it set as a string it seems to ignore them,
like proximity searching and so on.
example: text as string:
text:"law order"~33
text:"law order"~33
text:law order
text:law order
text as text:
yeah something is definitely strange, i think i know what it is though.
im going to make a separate post for it, but it cached the results from when
i had field:text as a string,
Erik Hatcher-4 wrote:
>
> I just tried this on trunk and both with and without a field selector
> it parses to
I just tried this on trunk and both with and without a field selector
it parses to a PhraseQuery. I have trouble believing even Solr 1.3
behaved like you reported, something seems fishy.
Erik
On Sep 18, 2009, at 9:02 AM, DHast wrote:
well it seems what is happening is solr is not
well it seems what is happening is solr is not being consistent,
DHast wrote:
>
> hi,
> if i do a search: text:"law order"~40
> i get this:
>
> text:"law order"~40
> text:"law order"~40
> PhraseQuery(text:"law order"~40)
> text:"law order"~40
> OldLuceneQParser
>
> However if i do: "law ord
hi,
if i do a search: text:"law order"~40
i get this:
text:"law order"~40
text:"law order"~40
PhraseQuery(text:"law order"~40)
text:"law order"~40
OldLuceneQParser
However if i do: "law order"~40
i get this:
"law order"~40
"law order"~40
text:law order
text:law order
OldLuceneQParser
my Sche
Hi,
I have setup solr search server in tomcat.
I am able to fire queries(of any knid) & get results in xml format.
Now i want to Integerate it(solr) with ruby on rails .
I know ruby on rails has inbuilt plugin acts_as_solr which helps in
integerating(talking) with solr.
acts_as_solr comes bund
I also seem to be having a similar problem deleting. As far as I can tell,
the system thinks we are deleting the records (it logs that it's executing
the commands and all looks OK) but the records always remain. Regardsless
if we try a delete by ID or by query, nothing happens. It's also not ex
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the suggestions, perhaps I am closer to the
> goal, but still don't
> get the result. I would like to find accented characters
> (mapped by the
> MappingCharFilterFactory) by writing unaccented queries. On
> this page:
>
> http://issues.ez.no/IssueView.php?Id=14742&activeItem
> Hi,
> I am doing exact word search in Solr 1.3 and I am not
> getting the expected results.
> I am giving you the sample XML file along with the mail
> from where search results are fetched.
> The following steps were followed to achieve exact word
> search result in Solr.
You can simply use th
On Sep 17, 2009, at 6:14 PM, Lance Norskog wrote:
Yes. &facet=false means "don't do any faceting". This is why you don't
get any facet data back. This is probably a bug in the solr-ruby code.
Version number 0.0.x is probably a hint about its production-ready
status :)
Actually solr-ruby is ple
Hello,
A rather trivial question on omitNorms parameter in schema.xml. The
out-of-the-box schema.xml uses this parameter during both within
the tag and tag and If we define the omitNorms during
the fieldType definition, will it hold good for all fields that are defined
using the same fieldType.
Hi,
Thanks for the suggestions, perhaps I am closer to the goal, but still don't
get the result. I would like to find accented characters (mapped by the
MappingCharFilterFactory) by writing unaccented queries. On this page:
http://issues.ez.no/IssueView.php?Id=14742&activeItem=2
I've found that
Hello,
I have setup Tomcat 6 and Solr 1.3.0 and it works fine for single cores. Now I
am trying to make it multicore and the cores don't seem to be recognized.
This works:
/solr/home/conf/schema.xml
/solr/home/conf/solrconfig.xml
/solr/home/data/
Clicking the admin link on the "Welcome to Solr
Hi,
I am doing exact word search in Solr 1.3 and I am not getting the expected
results.
I am giving you the sample XML file along with the mail from where search
results are fetched.
The following steps were followed to achieve exact word search result in Solr.
1) Schema.xml is configured
On Sep 17, 2009, at 7:11 PM, Lance Norskog wrote:
This looks like a Ruby client bug.
Maybe, but I doubt it in this case.
But let's have some details of the Ruby code used to make the request,
and what gets logged on the first Solr for the request.
Erik
If you do the same que
On Sep 18, 2009, at 1:09 AM, rajan chandi wrote:
We are planning to use the external Solr on tomcat for scalability
reasons.
We thought that EmbeddedSolrServer uses HTTP too to talk with Ruby and
vise-versa as in acts_as_solr ruby plugin.
EmbeddedSolrServer is a way to run Solr as an API (l
42 matches
Mail list logo
