Hi all
I am using SOLR 1.4.1 (according to solr info), but no matter what date
field I use (date or tdate) defined in default schema.xml, I cannot do a
search in solr-admin analysis.jsp:
fieldtype: date(or tdate)
fieldvalue(index): 2006-12-22T13:52:13Z (I type it in manually, no trailing
space)
f
The patch solr 2242 for getting count of distinct facet terms doesn't
work for distributedProcess
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2242)
The error log says
HTTP ERROR 500
Problem accessing /solr/select. Reason:
For input string: "numFacetTerms"
java.lang.NumberFormatExcept
The only thing I can think of is to post-process your snippets. I.E. pull the
highlighting tags out of the strings, look for the match in your result
"description" field looking for a match, and if you find one, replace that
"description" with the original highlight text (i.e. with the highligh
Hi Bob,
I have no idea how I missed that! Thanks for pointing me to use hl.snippets
- that did the magic!
Please allow me squeeze one more question along the same line.
Since I'm now able to display multiple snippets - what I'm trying to achieve
is, determine which highlighted snippet maps back
What is your actual query? Did you look at the "hl.snippets" parameter?
Bob Sandiford | Lead Software Engineer | SirsiDynix
P: 800.288.8020 X6943 | bob.sandif...@sirsidynix.com
www.sirsidynix.com
Join the conversation - you may even get an iPad or Nook out of it!
Like us on Facebook!
Follow us
Hi All,
I am having a problem with search highlighting for multiValued fields and am
wondering if someone can point me in the right direction.
I have in my schema a multiValued field as such:
When I search for term "Tel", it returns me the correct doc:
...
Tel to talent 1
Tel to talent 2
Hi Markus,
It is Tika.
I tried using tika standalone.
On 5/26/11, Markus Jelsma wrote:
> Can you rule out Tika or Solr by trying to parse the file with a stand-alone
> Tika?
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I am using Solr 3.1 for one of our search based applications.
>> We are using DIH to index our data and
Thanks. I think I can take it form there!
Aaron Chmelik
Web Designer & Programmer
email: aaron.chme...@gmail.com
website: http://webdesign.aaronchmelik.com
phone: 651.757.5979
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Markus Jelsma
wrote:
> Optimizing an index forces segments to merge. Usually, segments
Optimizing an index forces segments to merge. Usually, segments are merged
automatically based on your mergeFactor setting. During a merge documents
flagged for deletion are really purged and the number of segments is reduces
which improves search performance. There are some good pages on mergeF
One more question - what does optimization do? Maybe to be a little more
precise - what happens to the index that requires optimizaion (what is the
problem and how does optimization solve it).
Aaron Chmelik
Web Designer & Programmer
email: aaron.chme...@gmail.com
website: http://webdesign.aaronchm
On May 26, 2011, at 1:55 PM, anass talby wrote:
> it seems like reserved key words can't be used as field names did you try
> to changes your date field name?
Interesting thought, but it didn't seem to help.
I changed the schema so it has both a "date" and a "eventDate" field (so as not
to inv
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/dev/trunk/solr/example/solr/conf/solrconfig.xml
Look for autocommit and maxDocs.
> Hi,
>
> I'm using DIH and want to perform commits each N processed document, how
> can I do this?
> thanks in advance
Define reindexing. Every new document is indexed and existing documents are
deleted and indexed as if it is a new document. Completely reindexing from
scratch is only required if breaking changes are made to the schema or if you
upgrade to a new version that uses another format and isn't able to
Hi,
I'm using DIH and want to perform commits each N processed document, how can
I do this?
thanks in advance
--
Anass
I've been trying to find a concise explanation of this, and seem to so far
have missed it. (Google, etc). What is the purpose/need to reindex a solr
index? How do you determine what provides the best performance? What
detrimental affects occur if you operate off of delta indexes?
Aaron Chmelik
Web
it seems like reserved key words can't be used as field names did you try
to changes your date field name?
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Jack Repenning wrote:
> Are there some sort of rules about what sort of fields can be copyFielded
> into other fields?
>
> My schema has (among other things
This is a limitation of Lucene/Solr in that there is no way to tell it to not
match across mutli-valued field occurences.
A workaround is to convert your query to a phrase and add a "slop" factor less
than your posititonIncrementGap. ex: q="alice trudy"~99 ... This example
assumes that your
Hi, maybe I wasn't so clear in my previous post. Here's another go (I'd like
a reply :) ):
Currently I'm issuing this query on Solr:
http://localhost:9001/solrfacetsearch/master_Shop/select/?q=%28keyword_text_mv%3A%28alice+AND+trudy%29%29+AND+%28catalogId%3A%22Default%22%29+AND+%28catalogVersion%3
Can you rule out Tika or Solr by trying to parse the file with a stand-alone
Tika?
> Hi All,
>
> I am using Solr 3.1 for one of our search based applications.
> We are using DIH to index our data and TikaEntityProcessor to index
> attachments.
> Currently we are running into an issue while extra
Are there some sort of rules about what sort of fields can be copyFielded into
other fields?
My schema has (among other things):
> required="true" />
> required="true" />
> required="false"
> multiValued="true" />
> ...
>
>
>
The "user" field gets copied into "text" j
I ran the command bin/nutch crawl urls -dir crawl -depth 3 >& crawl.log
When I viewed crawl.log I found some errors such as:
Can't retrieve Tika parser for mime-typeapplication/x-shockwave-flash, and some
other similar messages for other types such as application/xml, etc.
Do I need to download
Hi antonio,
can you explain a bit more, how exactly have you implemented the
autocomplete, is it with the terms component only? Does autocomplete operate
on letter or word level?
What does user type in for which the server returns both "Rome" and "Near
Rome"?
-- Dmitry
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 5:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2463
Haven't received any input/comments on this issue. Has anyone else
witnessed this behavior?
Thanks.
Yep, it's possible. Setup two spellcheckers, one named "spellwhat" and one
named "spellwhere" and enable both on your searchRequestHandler.
--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
On 26. mai 2011, at 12.04, roySolr wrote:
> Hello,
>
> First i will explain my
Since FieldCache is an expert level API in lucene, there is no direct control
provided by SOLR/Lucene to control its size.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/FieldCache-tp2987541p2989443.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
I'm working with Solrj, and I like to use the SolrResponseBase.toString()
method, as it seems to return JSON. However, the JSON returned is not
valid, as it misses quotes. If I search directly against Solr using
http://localhost:8080/apache-solr-3.1-SNAPSHOT/select/?q=*%3A*&version=2.2&start
fieldCache stores one entry for each field that is used for sorting or for
field faceting when you use the fieldCache (fc) method. Before solr 1.4 the
method for field faceting was the enum method that executes a filter query for
each unique value of the field and stores it in the filterCache. F
If I'm not wrong, solrj uses slf4j for logging. slf4j-api.jar provides the api,
but is not capable by itself to do the actual logging.
For it to be able to log, it needs an actual implementation, usually a binding
to some other logging library.
slf4j-jdk14 is the binding that uses the logging API
10 unique terms on 1.5M documents each with 50+ fields? I don't think so ;)
What I mean is controlling its size like the other caches. There are
currently no options in solrconfig.xml to control this cache.
Is Solr/Lucene managing this all by itself?
It could be that my understanding of the Fiel
Are you trying to do something like this:
defType=dismax&qf=what where&q=(spellchek me with both diktionaries fur what
and where)
??
If so, then I believe your only option is to create a third dictionary that
combines "what" and "where" into one big uber-dictionary. Create a new field
and "c
Reading the wiki, for use solrj i must use this lib:
>From /lib
•slf4j-jdk14-1.5.5.jar
But there isn't no one directory call lib, and no one jar called
slf4j-jdk14-1.5.5.jar .
Is it necessary? When i can get it?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-3-1-wi
(11/05/26 13:23), Andy wrote:
Hi,
When specifying an analyzer for a fieldType, I can say type="index" or
type="query"
What if I don't spcify the type for an analyzer? Does it default to "index" or
"query" or both?
Both.
koji
--
http://www.rondhuit.com/en/
Hi Dmitry Kan, thanks for your anwser.
This is an idea, but i think that will be not so performing. Because if the
terms are 1000, i must reorder 1000 terms by own length, and i think the
time will be high for make autocomplete.
Don't you think?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 7:06 PM, deepak agrawal wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> When i am Indexing the Record into the Solr it is successfully indexing and
> after that i am committing that commit is also showing successfully.
> but when i am going to search that particular record into the solr that time
> i
Ensure that when you add your documents, their "type" value is
effectively set to either "table1" or table"2".
did you mean i set in schema.xml???
but as far as i concern there can only be one document tag then what about
the table2??
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene
Stefen, as u can see
template="{torder.UID_PK},${torderattribute.UID_PK}
" />
orderUID is a foreignkey for the table torderattribue which maps to
UID_PK(pk) of torder.
when i run the query "select UID_PK fro
Hi All,
When i am Indexing the Record into the Solr it is successfully indexing and
after that i am committing that commit is also showing successfully.
but when i am going to search that particular record into the solr that time
i am not getting that record from Solr.
I am using Solr1.4.1 version
Hi Romi,
A simple way to do so is to define in your schema.xml the union of all
the columns you need plus a "type" field to distinguish your entities.
eg, In your DB
table1 :
- col1 : varchar
- col2 : int
- col3 : float
table2 :
- col1 : int
- col2 : varchar
- col3 : int
- col4 : varchar
in
Thanks, Yuhan. I will look into both methods. Which is better or which method
is recommended?
How do I search through a database?
Raj
-Original Message-
From: Yuhan Zhang [mailto:yzh...@onescreen.com]
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 7:16 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: SOL
Hi pravesh,
Thanks for the quick reply.
--Dmitry
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:27 PM, pravesh wrote:
> What would be the default value for omitNorms?
> --- Default value is "false"
>
> Is general advise to ignore this and set the value explicitly?
> --- Depends on your requirement. Do this on fiel
What would be the default value for omitNorms?
--- Default value is "false"
Is general advise to ignore this and set the value explicitly?
--- Depends on your requirement. Do this on field-per-field basis. Set to
"false" on fields where you want the norms, or, set to "true" on fields
where you w
Hi All,
I am using Solr 3.1 for one of our search based applications.
We are using DIH to index our data and TikaEntityProcessor to index
attachments.
Currently we are running into an issue while extracting content from one of
our MS Excel 2007 files, using TikaEntityProcessor.
The issue is the T
what is QueryElevationComponent, why it is used. in my schema.xml if i do not
declare a uniqueKey then it shows the error
org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: QueryElevationComponent requires the
schema to have a uniqueKeyField
why so ??
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucen
first, you're missing a $ Sign for the first Variable.
second, why not just ? The -Tag has no
ID, in case you're using the TemplateTransformer.
I got my solution..thanks for it.
but after looking your this reply..please make it clear:
UID_PK is a column in my database table torderattribute, the
Hi, i was not getting reply for this post, so here i am reposting this,
please reply.
In my database i have two types of entity customer and product. I want to
index customer related information in one document and product related
information in other document. is it possible via solr , if so how
Romi,
first, you're missing a $ Sign for the first Variable.
second, why not just ? The -Tag has no
ID, in case you're using the TemplateTransformer.
Regards
Stefan
Am 26.05.2011 14:16, schrieb Romi:
I tried it as :
templat
Hi Chandan,
What would be the default value for omitNorms? Is general advise to ignore
this and set the value explicitly?
--Dmitry
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Chandan Tamrakar <
chandan.tamra...@nepasoft.com> wrote:
> When you say "omitnorms=true" for any fields it means SOLR will not
>
Thanks a lot :)...finally i made it, template transformer is doing exactly
what i wanted to do. :) :)
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/UniqueKey-field-in-schema-xml-tp2987807p2988608.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
We have increased the now ,but since we have a number
of instances on a single server and also number of ids that will get
added to filter wll be increasing ...with no known limit ,I was wonderng f
there was any other scalable method not affected by the ..
Also on looking at Manifold CF Do
Yes as i said earlier
. If you want to store the value of field as it is in index without
Tokenizing . .for example customer_id which is a unique fields and you
don't want to tokenize
when you index a field you could tokenize the field values to index based on
what tokenizer you use so that us
Thanks for making me understand the concept of indexing and storing field.
now i got the point :)
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/problem-in-setting-field-attribute-in-schema-xml-tp2984126p2988516.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive a
:), Thanks.. now i got the purpose of indexed and store.
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/problem-in-setting-field-attribute-in-schema-xml-tp2984126p2988506.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi Romi,
as someone mentioned earlier already:
indexed - The field value can be "matched" when you search on that
field (field:"some-value-to-match")
stored -The field value can be "retrieved" from Solr in result sets
(result docs can include that field and its value)
@ Indexing i
Am 26.05.2011 14:10, schrieb Romi:
did u mean when i set indexed="false" and store="true", solr does not index
the field's value but store its value as it is???
I don't know if you are asking me since you do not quote anything but
yes of course this is exactly the purpose of "indexed" and "sto
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Romi wrote:
> did u mean when i set indexed="false" and store="true", solr does not index
> the field's value but store its value as it is???
Yes. So you can get back the value of all stored fields even if your
search actually only finds results in indexed fields.
This will help:
http://cephas.net/blog/2008/03/30/how-morelikethis-works-in-lucene/
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/How-does-Solr-s-MoreLikeThis-component-internally-work-to-get-results-tp2938407p2988487.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at
I tried it as :
template="{torder.UID_PK},${torderattribute.UID_PK}
" />
But i suppose it is not correct because here i am not mapping UID_PK of
torderattribute to any of field in schema.xml. can i add like
Do you really require multi-shards? Single core/shard will do for even
millions of documents and the search will be faster than searching on
multi-shards.
Consider multi-shard when you cannot scale-up on a single shard/machine(e.g,
CPU,RAM etc. becomes major block).
Also read through the SOLR di
did u mean when i set indexed="false" and store="true", solr does not index
the field's value but store its value as it is???
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/problem-in-setting-field-attribute-in-schema-xml-tp2984126p2988458.html
Sent from the Solr -
Hi All,
Please help me in implementing TermsComponent in my current Solr solution.
Regards,
Solr User
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Solr User wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am using Solr 1.4.0 and dismax as request handler.I have the following in
> my solrconfig.xml in the dismax request handler ta
Am 26.05.2011 12:52, schrieb Romi:
i have done it, i deleted old indexes and created new indexes but still able
to search it through *:*, and no result when i search it as field:value.
really surprising result. :-O
I really don't understand your problem. Thist is not at all surprising
but the
I guess you are indexing with property index=false , stored = true
if it is , that means you are storing the value on "index" , so whenever
you do *:* you can see the stored value
for example
if you have a field = ID, Customer_Name and you would only like to index
"customer_name" becaus
Romi,
then you want to use the
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DataImportHandler#TemplateTransformer ? :)
Regards
Stefan
Am 26.05.2011 13:17, schrieb Romi:
i might have misspelled the question.
this is the entry in my db-data-config.xml file:
now i want combi
Just read through:
http://www.springbyexample.org/examples/solr-client.html
http://static.springsource.org/spring-roo/reference/html/base-solr.html
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-to-integrate-solr-with-spring-framework-tp2955540p2988363.html
Sent from th
For saving Memory:
1. allocate as much memory to the JVM (especially if you are using 64bit OS)
2. You can set "omitNorms=true" for your date & id fields (actually for all
fields where index-time boosting & length normalization isn't required. This
will require a full reindex)
3. Are you sorting o
i might have misspelled the question.
this is the entry in my db-data-config.xml file:
now i want combine UID_PK and UID for the uniqueKey of my indexing documet.
i want to know how can i achieve this through schema.xml
Thanks
Romi
-
Romi
--
View this mes
Here is some code:
--
final String key1 = "1";
final String key2 = "2";
final String masterKey = key1 + ":" + key2;
--
You need to combine the keys *before* you send them to Solr.
François
On May 26, 2011, at 7:02 AM, Romi wrote:
> I am not getting how can i combine two keys in to a
I am not getting how can i combine two keys in to a single string using some
delimiter
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/UniqueKey-field-in-schema-xml-tp2987807p2988284.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
i have done it, i deleted old indexes and created new indexes but still able
to search it through *:*, and no result when i search it as field:value.
really surprising result. :-O
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/problem-in-setting-field-attribute-in
You concatenate the two keys into a single string, with some sort of delimiter
between the two keys.
François
On May 26, 2011, at 6:05 AM, Romi wrote:
> what do you mean by combine two fields customerID and ProductId.
> what i tried is
> 1. make both fields unique but it doesnot server my pur
Hi all,
I have a catch-all field defined as a CopyField in the Schema and use a POJO
to create the documents, thus the POJO doesn't include the catch-all field.
The SolrDocuments retrieved contains the fields set up in the POJO and
doesn't include the CopyFields.
Is-it possible to access the con
Well I'm probably being overly cautious here but its been my
experience that if I have a schema that says indexed = true on a field
and I change it to indexed = false I have to delete my index to get
rid of everything that was indexed with the old schema and I have to
restart to be able to index wi
i deleted my index but what do u mean by restart with new schema??
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/problem-in-setting-field-attribute-in-schema-xml-tp2984126p2988197.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I'm sure you can fix this by increasing value to some
max.
This shld apply to filter query as well
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Too-many-Boolean-Clause-and-Filter-Query-tp2974848p2988190.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>From my experience if it is indexing content that you have told it not
to index that is because you haven't cleared your old indexed content.
If you index something using schema version 5 which says indexed =
true and then you change it to indexed = false you have to delete your
old indexed conten
tag represents to the actual SOLR document that will be posted by
the DIH. This mapping is used by the DIH to map DB-to-index document.
You can have multiple tags, as you might be pulling data from more
than 1 table.
You can only have one tag in you db-data-config.xml (remember,
the purpose of
what do you mean by combine two fields customerID and ProductId.
what i tried is
1. make both fields unique but it doesnot server my purpose
2. make a new field ID and copy both customerID , ProductId into ID using
CopyField and now make ID as uniqueKey
but i got a error saying: Document specifie
Hello,
First i will explain my situation. I have a 2 fields on my website: What and
Where.
When a user search i want spellcheck on both fields. Now i have 2
dictionaries, one for
what and one for where. I want to search with one request and spellcheck
both fields. Is
it possible and how?
--
View
This is because you may be having only 10 unique terms in your indexed Field.
BTW, what do you mean by controlling the FieldCache?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/FieldCache-tp2987541p2988142.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
omitNorms="true" on a field will have following effect:
1. length normalization will not work on the specific field--> Which means
matching documents with shorter length will not be preferred/boost over
matching documents with greater length for the specific field, at search
time.
2. Index time bo
Create a new unique field for this purpose, like, "myUniqueField", then, just
combine (product-id+cust-id) and post it to this new field.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/UniqueKey-field-in-schema-xml-tp2987807p2988098.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list
thanks a lot bryan: it might be again the repetition, but i just want to know
WHY it is indexing the field when it is indexed="false", what if
stored="true", it is clearly written in documentation that a field is search
able only if it is indexed="true", which surely make sense.
and my application
> ya...but when i set indexed="false" for a particular field, and i search as
> *:* then it will search all documents thats true, but what i think is it
> should not contain the field which i set as indexed="true".
> for example in a document fields are id, author,title. and i for author
> field i
??
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Spellcheck-Two-dictionaries-tp2931458p2987915.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
suppose I have two tables in database, say product table and customer table.i
want to make (productID,customerID) a uniqueKey for my indexing document.
how can i achieve this.
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/UniqueKey-field-in-schema-xml-tp2987807p2
Norms are used to boosts and field length normalization during indexing
time so that short document has higher score
How it is that if i set omitnorms="false" for a field then short documents
have higher score. i could not get this point , might be because i could not
find any running example for
it seems, try again for better results
-
Romi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Single-document-scanning-tp2987614p2987788.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
87 matches
Mail list logo
