Re: Shingle and Query Performance

Hi, What is the difference between solr 3.3 and the trunk ? I will try 3.3 and let you know the results. Here the search handler: explicit 10 mrank:[0 TO 100] explicit 10 edismax title^1.05 url^1.2 content^1.7 m_title^10.0 content^18.0 m_

Re: getting old records in database

depends on the case. we have a database here that updates very frequently, so we just added a field named syncid and set it to the index day. everytime the database updates it updates the syncid to the current day. after we perform a full database update, we tell solr to delete all records differe

Re: Shingle and Query Performance

I'm not sure what the issue could be at this point. I see you've got qt=search - what's the definition of that request handler? What is the parsed query (from the debugQuery response)? Have you tried this with Solr 3.3 to see if there's any appreciable difference? Erik On Aug 27, 201

Re: Shingle and Query Performance

When grouping off the query time ie 3567 ms to 1912 ms . Grouping increasing the query time and make useless to cache. But same config faster without shingle still. We have and head to head test this wednesday tihs commercial search engine. So I am looking for all suggestions. On Sat, Aug 27,

getting old records in database

hi we developed a solr and connected to database and getting the records from database. now we deleted the records in table but iam getting the old records in solr... to solve this what we have to do. how to solve this problem thanks in advance -- View this message in context: http://lu

Re: Shingle and Query Performance

Please confirm is this is caused by grouping. Turn grouping off, what's query time like? On Aug 27, 2011, at 07:27 , Lord Khan Han wrote: > On the other hand We couldnt use the cache for below types queries. I think > its caused from grouping. Anyway we need to be sub second without cache. >

Re: Error while decoding %DC (Ü) from URL - results in ?

Merlin Ü encodes to two characters in utf-8 (C39C), and one in iso-8859-1 (%DC) so it looks like there is a charset mismatch somewhere. Cheers François On Aug 27, 2011, at 6:34 AM, Merlin Morgenstern wrote: > Hello, > > I am having problems with searches that are issued from spiders that

Re: Shingle and Query Performance

On the other hand We couldnt use the cache for below types queries. I think its caused from grouping. Anyway we need to be sub second without cache. On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Lord Khan Han wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the reply. > > Here the solr log capture.: > > ** > > hl.fragsize=1

Re: Shingle and Query Performance

Hi, Thanks for the reply. Here the solr log capture.: ** hl.fragsize=100&spellcheck=true&spellcheck.q=X&group.limit=5&hl.simple.pre=&hl.fl=content&spellcheck.collate=true&wt=javabin&hl=true&rows=20&version=2&fl=score,approved,domain,host,id,lang,mimetype,title,tstamp,url,category&hl.snip

Error while decoding %DC (Ü) from URL - results in ?

Hello, I am having problems with searches that are issued from spiders that contain the ASCII encoded character "ü" For example in : "Übersetzung" The solr log shows following query request: /suche/%DCbersetzung which has been translated into solr query: q=?ersetzung If you enter the search ter

Re: Viewing the complete document from within the index

Karthik, I sure could be wrong but I never found this. My search tool implementations (3 thus far, one on solr, all on the web) have always proceeded with one tool for experts called something like "indexed-view" which basically remade the indexing process as a "dry-run". This can also be don