Finotti Simone yoox.com> writes:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have been assigned the task to migrate from Endeca to Solr.
>
> The former engine allowed me to set keyword triggers that, when matched
exactly, caused the web client to
> redirect to a specified URL.
>
> Does that feature exist in Solr? If so
> abstract away the encoding of the index
Robert, this is what you wrote. "Abstract away the encoding of the
index" means pluggable, otherwise it's not abstract and / or it's a
flawed design. Sounds like it's the latter.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Jason Rutherglen
wrote:
>> Otherwise we have "flexible indexing" where "flexible" means "slower
>> if you do anything but the default".
>
> The other encodings should exist as modules since they are pluggable.
> 4.0 can ship with the existing codec. 4.1 with addit
> Otherwise we have "flexible indexing" where "flexible" means "slower
> if you do anything but the default".
The other encodings should exist as modules since they are pluggable.
4.0 can ship with the existing codec. 4.1 with additional codecs and
the bulk postings at a later time.
Otherwise it
It looks to me like everything matches down the line but top level says
otherQuery is a non-match... I don't get it?
-
-
0
77
-
SyncMaster
*,score
on
on
0
+syncmaster -SyncMaster
standard
standard
41
2.2
+
-
+syncmaster -SyncMaster
+syncma
(I am using solr 3.4 and edismax.)
In my index, I have a multivalued field named "genre". One of the
values this field can have is "Citation". I would like documents that
have a genre field of Citation to always be at the bottom of the
search results.
I've been experimenting, but I can't seem to
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Jason Rutherglen
wrote:
> +1 I suggested it should be backported a while back. Or that Lucene
> 4.x should be released. I'm not sure what is holding up Lucene 4.x at
> this point, bulk postings is only needed useful for PFOR.
This is not true, most modern index
I would love to see this too. Most of our data comes from a relational
database, but there are some files on the file system related to our products
that may need to be indexed. The files have different change control / life
cycle, so I can't be sure that our application will know when this da
> We should maybe try to fix this in 3.x too?
+1 I suggested it should be backported a while back. Or that Lucene
4.x should be released. I'm not sure what is holding up Lucene 4.x at
this point, bulk postings is only needed useful for PFOR.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Simon Willnauer
wro
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Simon Willnauer
wrote:
> Hey Roman,
>
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Roman Alekseenkov
> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I'm looking for some help with Solr indexing issues on a large scale.
>>
>> We are indexing few terabytes/month on a sizeable Solr cluster (8
Hey Roman,
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Roman Alekseenkov
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm looking for some help with Solr indexing issues on a large scale.
>
> We are indexing few terabytes/month on a sizeable Solr cluster (8
> masters / serving writes, 16 slaves / serving reads). After certain
I'm wondering if this is relevant:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2680 - Improve how
IndexWriter flushes deletes against existing segments
Roman
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Roman Alekseenkov
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm looking for some help with Solr indexing issues on a la
Hi everyone,
I'm looking for some help with Solr indexing issues on a large scale.
We are indexing few terabytes/month on a sizeable Solr cluster (8
masters / serving writes, 16 slaves / serving reads). After certain
amount of tuning we got to the point where a single Solr instance can
handle ind
An ability to update would be extremely useful for us. Different parts of
records sometimes come from different databases, and being able to update
after creation of the Solr index would be extremely useful.
I've made some processes that reads a record and adds a new field to it. The
most awkward
I'm trying to post a PDF along with a whole bunch of metadata fields to the
ExtractingRequestHandler as multipart/form-data. It works fine except for
the utf-8 character handling. Here is what my post looks like (abridged):
POST /solr/update/extract HTTP/1.1
TE: deflate,gzip;q=0.3
Conn
On 10/27/2011 5:56 AM, Michael Sokolov wrote:
From everything you've said, it certainly sounds like a low-level I/O
problem in the client, not a server slowdown of any sort. Maybe Perl
is using the same connection over and over (keep-alive) and Java is
not. I really don't know. One thing I'v
Hello all,
When moving a SOLR index to another instance I lost the files:
segments.gen
segments_xk
I have the .cfs file complete.
What are my options to recover the data.
Any ideia that I can test?
Thank you.
Frederico Azeiteiro
Related questions is:
Is there a way to update a doc to remove a specific value from a
multi-value field (in my case remove a role)
I manage to do that by querying the doc and reading all the other values
"manually" then saving, but that has the same issues and is inefficient.
On 10/28/11 10
Sorry for the lengthy text, it's a bit difficult to explain:
We are using Solr to index some user info like username, email (among
other things).
I'm also trying to use facets for search, so for example, I added a
multi-value field to user called "organizations" where I would store the
name
Hi,
I solved the issue. I added to my schema.xml the following lines:
...
...
Then, I re-index and everything is working great :-)
Thanks for your help.
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Boris Quiroz wrote:
> Hi Erick,
>
> I'll try without the type="index" on analyzer tag and then I'l
Ah! That all makes sense. The example on the SpacialSearchDev page
should have that bit added in!
I'm back in business now, thanks Yonik!
-- Chris
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Yonik Seeley
wrote:
> Oops, didn't mean for this conversation to leave the mailing lists.
>
> OK, so your lat a
Oops, didn't mean for this conversation to leave the mailing lists.
OK, so your lat and lon types were being stored as text but not
indexed (hence no search matches).
A dynamic field of "*" does tend to hide bugs/problems ;-)
> So should I have another for _latLon? Would it look like:
>
Yep.
Thank you Erik,
Now i understand the difference between Q and QF.
Unfortunately, there is 1 unsolved problem left (didn't find the answer
yesterday evening).
I added grouping on this query, because i want to show a group of trips with
the same code only once. (A trip has multiple departure days,
So I have to ask my question again.
Is there any reason not to use Replication in Solr and use Collection
Distribution?
Thanks
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Alireza Salimi wrote:
> I can't see those benchmarks, can you?
>
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Marc Sturlese wrote:
>
>> Replicatio
Hi Erick,
I'll try without the type="index" on analyzer tag and then I'll
re-index some files.
Thanks for you answer.
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Hmmm, I'm not sure what happens when you specify
> (without type="index" and
> . I have no clue which one
> is used.
>
Hi,
My Solr becomes very slow or hangs up at times, we have done almost
everything possible like
. Giving 16GB memory to JVM
. Sharding
But these help only for X time, i want to profile the server and see whats
going wrong? How can I profile solr remotely?
Regards,
Ro
Thanks, Marijn. I have logged the bug here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2863
Is there any chance of a workaround for this issue before the bug is fixed?
If you want to answer the question on StackOverflow:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7905756/solr-3-4-group-truncate-does-not-
Hi Ian,
I think this is a bug. After looking into the code the facet.query
feature doesn't take into account the group.truncate option.
This needs to be fixed. You can open a new issue in Jira if you want to.
Martijn
On 28 October 2011 12:09, Ian Grainger wrote:
> Hi, I'm using Grouping with gr
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:20 AM, Robert Muir wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Simon Willnauer
> wrote:
>> we are not actively removing norms. if you set omitNorms=true and
>> index documents they won't have norms for this field. Yet, other
>> segment still have norms until they get merg
Hi, I'm using Grouping with group.truncate=true, The following simple facet
query:
facet.query=Monitor_id:[38 TO 40]
Doesn't give the same number as the nGroups result (with
grouping.ngroups=true) for the equivalent filter query:
fq=Monitor_id:[38 TO 40]
I thought they should be
Am Mittwoch, den 26.10.2011, 08:02 -0400 schrieb Yonik Seeley:
> You can also try adding facet.method=enum directly to your request
Added
query.set("facet.method", "enum");
to my solr query at code level and now it works. Don't know why the
handler stuff gets ignored or overriden, but its
Cheers Kuli,
This is actually of huge importance to our customers, to see how many
documents we store.
The faceting option sounds a bit messy, maybe we'll have to stick with
2 queries.
---
IntelCompute
Web Design & Local Online Marketing
http://www.intelcompute.com
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:43:
Am 28.10.2011 11:16, schrieb Robert Brown:
> Is there no way to return the total number of docs as part of a search?
No, it isn't. Usually this information is of absolutely no value to the
end user.
A workaround would be to add some field to the schema that has the same
value for every document,
Currently I'm making 2 calls to Solr to be able to state "matched 20
out of 200 documents".
Is there no way to return the total number of docs as part of a
search?
--
IntelCompute
Web Design & Local Online Marketing
http://www.intelcompute.com
Have your tried using the join in the fq instead of the q?
Like this (assuming user_id_i is a field in the post document type and
self_id_i a field in the user document type):
q=posts_text:"hello"&fq={!join from=self_id_i
to=user_id_i}is_active_boolean:true
In this example the fq produces a docset
35 matches
Mail list logo
