Hi,
Thanks for the responses.
q.alt did the job. Turns out that the dismax query parser was at fault, and
wasn't able to handle queries of the type *:*. Putting the query in q.alt,
or adding a defType=lucene (as pointed out to me on the irc channel) worked.
Thanks,
--
- Siddhant
Here are a workaround of this issue:
On line 382 of SolrPhpClient/Apache/Solr/Service.php, I change to:
while(true){
$str = file_get_contents($url, false, $this->_postContext);
if(empty($str) == false){
break;
}
}
$response = new Apache_Solr_Response($str
: i.e. just extend facet.sort to allow a 'count desc'. By convention, ok
: to use a a space in the name? - or would count.desc (and count.asc as
: alias for count) be more compliant?
i would use space to remain consistent with the existing "sort"
param.
it might even make sense to refactor (
Hi Israel
Thank you for your response.
However, I use both ini_set and set the _defaultTimeout to 6000 but the
error still occur with same error message.
Now, when I start build the index, the error pops up much faster than
changing it before.
So do you have any idea?
Thank you in advance for
Hoss,
Would you suggest using dedup for my use case; and if so, do you know of a
working example I can reference?
I don't have an issue using the patched version of Solr, but I'd much rather
use the GA version.
-Kelly
hossman wrote:
>
>
> : Dedupe is completely the wrong word. Deduping is
Hi,
I have a deployment with 2 indexers (2 cores in a single servlet container),
and a farm of searchers that replicate from one of the indexers. Once in a
while I need to re-index all my data, so I do that on my second indexer
(while my original indexer still gets incremental updates), then swap
: Dedupe is completely the wrong word. Deduping is something else
: entirely - it is about trying not to index the same document twice.
Dedup can also certainly be used with field collapsing -- that was one of
the initial use cases identified for the SignatureUpdateProcessorFactory
... you can
Hm, Ryan, you may have inadvertently solved the problem. :)
Going flat out in a loop, indexing 1 doc at a time, I can only index
about 17,000 per minute - roughly what I was seeing with my app
running... which makes me suspicious. The number is too close to be
coincidental.
It could very well b
Hi Qiuyan,
> Thanks a lot. It works now. When i added the line
> #set($hl = $response.highlighting)
> i got the highlighting. But i wonder if there's any document that
> describes the usage of that. I mean i didn't know the name of those
> methods. Actually i just managed to guess it.
Solritas (ak
>> if you are using auto-commit, you should not call commit from the
client
Cheers, thanks.
>> Do you need the index to be updated this often?
Wouldn't increasing the autocommit time make it worse? (ie more
documents buffered)
I can extend it and see what effect it has
-Nick
-Origi
On Jan 13, 2010, at 5:34 PM, Minutello, Nick wrote:
Agreed, commit every second.
Do you need the index to be updated this often? Are you reading from
it every second? and need results that are that "fresh"
If not, i imagine increasing the auto-commit time to 1min or even 10
secs would
Hi,
Pointers:
* What happens when you don't use a field name?
* What are your logs showing?
* What is &debugQuery=on showing?
* What is the Analysis page for some of the problematic queries showing?
Otis
--
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Solr - Lucene - Nutch
Bill,
If you are using Solr 1.4, don't bother with rsync, use the Java-based
replication - info on zee Wiki.
Otis
--
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Solr - Lucene - Nutch
From: Bill Bell
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Wed, January 13, 2010 12:21:4
Hi!
Garbage collection is an issue of the underlying JVM. You may use
–XX:+PrintGCDetails as an argument to your JVM in order to collect
details of the garbage collection. If you also use the parameter
–XX:+PrintGCTimeStamps you get the time stamps of the garbage
collection.
For further informat
Hi all,
The way the indexing works on our system is as follows:
We have a separate "staging" server with a copy of our web app. The
clients will index a number of documents in a batch on the staging
server (this happens about once a week), then they play with the results
on the staging server
Agreed, commit every second.
Assuming I understand what you're saying correctly:
There shouldn't be any index readers - as at this point, just writing to the
index.
Did I understand correctly what you meant?
-Nick
-Original Message-
From: Lance Norskog [mailto:goks...@gmail.com]
Sent:
The time in autocommit is in milliseconds. You are committing every
second while indexing. This then causes a build-up of sucessive index
readers that absorb each commit, which is probably the out-of-memory.
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Minutello, Nick
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a bit of an
You can do this filtering in the DataImportHandler. The regular
expression tool is probably enough:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DataImportHandler#RegexTransformer
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Harsch, Timothy J. (ARC-TI)[PEROT
SYSTEMS] wrote:
> Hi all,
> I tried creating a case-insensitive st
Robert Muir: Thank you for the pointer to that paper!
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 6:29 AM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
> Isn't the conclusion here that some "stopword and stemming free matching"
> should be the best match if ever and to then gently degrade to weaker forms
> of matching?
>
> paul
>
>
> Le
Thanks, I know I read that sometime back but I guess I thought that was because
there were no tags defined on the string field in the schema. I
guess cause I'm still kind of a noob - I didn't take that to mean that it
couldn't be made to have analyzers. A subtle but important distinction I gu
> That seems to work.
>
> But why? Does string type not support
> LowerCaseFilterFactory? Or KeywordTokenizerFactory?
From from apache-solr-1.4.0\example\solr\conf\schema.xml :
"The StrField type is not analyzed, but indexed/stored verbatim."
"solr.TextField allows the specification of custo
That seems to work.
But why? Does string type not support LowerCaseFilterFactory? Or
KeywordTokenizerFactory?
-Original Message-
From: Ahmet Arslan [mailto:iori...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 11:51 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: case-insensitive strin
I created a document that has a string field and a case insensitive string
field using my string_ci type, both have the same value sent at document
creation time: "miXCAse or LowER".
I attach two debug query results. One against the string type and one against
mine. The query is only differen
> The value in the srcANYSTRStrCI field
> is "miXCAse or LowER" according to Luke.
Can you try this fieldType (that uses class="solr.TextField") declaration and
re-start tomcat & re-index:
The value in the srcANYSTRStrCI field is "miXCAse or LowER" according to Luke.
-Original Message-
From: Harsch, Timothy J. (ARC-TI)[PEROT SYSTEMS]
[mailto:timothy.j.har...@nasa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 11:31 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: case-insensitive s
>From the query
http://localhost:8080/solr/select?q=idxPartition%3ASOMEPART%20AND%20srcANYSTRStrCI:%22mixcase%20or%20lower%22&debugQuery=on
Debug info attached
-Original Message-
From: Harsch, Timothy J. (ARC-TI)[PEROT SYSTEMS]
[mailto:timothy.j.har...@nasa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, Januar
I considered that, but I'm also having the issue that I can't get an exact
match as case insensitive either.
-Original Message-
From: Rob Casson [mailto:rob.cas...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 11:26 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: case-insensitive string t
What do you get when you add "&debugQuery=on" to your lower-case query?
And does Luke show you what you expect in the index?
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Harsch, Timothy J. (ARC-TI)[PEROT SYSTEMS]
wrote:
> Hi I have a field:
>
> multiValued="true" />
>
> With type definition:
>
from http://wiki.apache.org/solr/AnalyzersTokenizersTokenFilters
"On wildcard and fuzzy searches, no text analysis is performed on
the search word."
i'd just lowercase the wildcard-ed search term in your client code,
before you send it to solr.
hth,
rob
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Hars
Hi I have a field:
With type definition:
Hi,
I have a bit of an interesting OutOfMemoryError that I'm trying to
figure out.
My client & Solr server are running in the same JVM (for deployment
simplicity). FWIW, I'm using Jetty to host Solr. I'm using the supplied
code for the http-based client interface. Solr 1.3.0.
My app is adding a
The hanging didn't happen again since yesterday. I never run out of space
again. This is still a dev environment, so the number of searches is very low.
Maybe I'm just lucky...
Where can I see the garbage collection info?
-Original Message-
From: Marc Des Garets [mailto:marc.desgar...@
Thanks a lot. It works now. When i added the line
#set($hl = $response.highlighting)
i got the highlighting. But i wonder if there's any document that
describes the usage of that. I mean i didn't know the name of those
methods. Actually i just managed to guess it.
best regards,
Qiuyan
Quoti
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Bill Bell wrote:
> I am using Solr 1.4, and have 3 cores defined in solr.xml. Question on
> replication
>
> 1. How do I set up rsync replication from master to slaves? It was
> easy to do with just one core and one script.conf, but with multiple
> cores what i
Just curious, have you checked if the hanging you are experiencing is not
garbage collection related?
-Original Message-
From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com]
Sent: 13 January 2010 13:33
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Problem comitting on 40GB index
That's
Hi all,
I tried creating a case-insensitive string using the values provided to a
string, via CopyField. This didn't work, since copyField does it's job before
the analyzer on the case-insensitive string field is invoked.
Is there another way I might accomplish this field replication on the ser
I don't have experience with migrating, but you should consider using the
example schema.xml in the distro as a starting basis for creating your schema.
-Original Message-
From: Abin Mathew [mailto:abin.mat...@toostep.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 8:42 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.ap
On Jan 13, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Kevin Thorley wrote:
> I have tried several variations now, but have been unable to come up with a
> way to boost fields in a localsolr query. What I need to do is do a
> localsolr search and sort the result set so that a specific value is at the
> top. My idea w
I have tried several variations now, but have been unable to come up with a way
to boost fields in a localsolr query. What I need to do is do a localsolr
search and sort the result set so that a specific value is at the top. My idea
was to use a nested dismax query with a boost field like this
Hi all,
I'm trying to add multiple files to solr 1.4 with solrj.
With this programm 1 Doc is added to solr:
SolrServer server = SolrHelper.getServer();
server.deleteByQuery( "*:*" );// delete everything!
server.commit();
QueryResponse rsp = ser
Isn't the conclusion here that some "stopword and stemming free
matching" should be the best match if ever and to then gently degrade
to weaker forms of matching?
paul
Le 13-janv.-10 à 07:08, Walter Underwood a écrit :
There is a band named "The The". And a producer named "Don Was". For
Hi,
I created Jira issue SOLR-1721 and attached simple patch ( no
documentation ) for this.
HIH,
Alex
2010/1/13 Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ् :
> it can be added
>
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Alexey Serba wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I found that there's no explicit option to run DataImportHandler
That's my understanding.. But fortunately disk space is cheap
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 5:01 AM, Frederico Azeiteiro <
frederico.azeite...@cision.com> wrote:
> Sorry, my bad... I replied to a current mailing list message only changing
> the subject... Didn't know about this " Hijacking" p
right, but we should not encourage users to significantly degrade
overall relevance for all movies due to a few movies and a band (very
special cases, as I said).
In english, by not using stopwords, it doesn't really degrade
relevance that much, so its a reasonable decision to make. This is not
tr
Hi Vijay,
see this thread:
http://www.mail-archive.com/solr-user@lucene.apache.org/msg28726.html
Cheers,
Chantal
vi...@8kmiles.com schrieb:
Hi,
I am using the "More Like This" feature. I have configured it in
solrconfig.xml as a dedicated request handler and I am using SolrJ.
It's working pr
Hi all,
is it possible to restrict the returned facets to only those that apply
to the filter query but still use mincount=0? Keeping those that have a
count of 0 but apply to the filter, and at the same time leaving out
those that are not covered by the filter (and thus 0, as well).
Some l
try /solr/select?q.alt=*:*&qt=dismax
or /solr/select?q=some search term&qt=dismax
dismax should be configured in solrconfig.xml by default, but you have
to adapt it to list the fields from your schema.xml
and for anything with known field:
/solr/select?q=field:value&qt=standard
Cheers,
Chanta
Hi,
I am using the "More Like This" feature. I have configured it in
solrconfig.xml as a dedicated request handler and I am using SolrJ.
It's working properly when the similarity fields are all text data types.
But when I add a field whose datatype is 'sint', it's throwing an exception.
Except
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Lance Norskog wrote:
> You can do this stripping in the DataImportHandler. You would have to
> write your own stripping code using regular expresssions.
Note that DIH has a HTMLStripTransformer which wraps Solr's HTMLStripReader.
--
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Man
Hi all,
Any query I make which is of type field:value does not return any documents.
Same is the case for the *:* query. The *:* query doesn't return any result
either. The index size is close to 1GB now, so it should be returning some
documents. The rest of the queries are functioning properly. A
Sorry, my bad... I replied to a current mailing list message only changing the
subject... Didn't know about this " Hijacking" problem. Will not happen again.
Just for close this issue, if I understand correctly, for an index of 40G, I
will need, for running an optimize:
- 40G if all activity on
I'd look at the DataImportHandler console and try using some debugging
there to track down why only one document. I suspect it's a
configuration issue of your SQL query not picking up everything you
expect.
Erik
On Jan 12, 2010, at 9:33 AM, Lee Smith wrote:
Hi Erik
Done as sugg
52 matches
Mail list logo
