Hello, Shawn!
I have seen that when disabling replication and executing queries the time
responses are good. Interesting... I can't ser the solution, then, because slow
replication tomes are needed to almost always get 'fresh' documents in slaves
to search by, but this appareantly slows down f
On 11/5/2013 10:22 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> If you do not want the *entire* string treated as a single term for the
> query parser, then you cannot use escapeQueryChars. You'll need to
> write your own code that is aware of the specific special characters
> that you want to escape.
If your query
On 11/5/2013 9:41 PM, dboychuck wrote:
> I'm having the same issue with solrJ 4.5.1
>
> If I use the escapeQueryChars() function on a string like "a b c" it is
> escaping it to "a\+b\+c" which returns 0 results using edismax query parser.
> However "a b c" returns results.
A space is a special ch
I'm having the same issue with solrJ 4.5.1
If I use the escapeQueryChars() function on a string like "a b c" it is
escaping it to "a\+b\+c" which returns 0 results using edismax query parser.
However "a b c" returns results.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/s
I'm not sure if my answer would help you :-).
Usually we do not need to know the min and max prices that our current
database or solr is holding for all the products. Even if you were to that,
would be complex and just make your business logic bigger and tedious.
Instead, we would know what is th
Yes it is
facet.sort=index would return facet result set in alphabetical order
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-sort-facets-by-name-tp4099499p4099522.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
(13/11/06 9:00), PeterKerk wrote:
By default solr sorts facets by the amount of hits for each result. However,
I want to sort by facetnames alphabetically. Earlier I sorted the facets on
the client or via my .NET code, however, this time I need solr to return the
results with alphabetically sorte
Hi Eric,
Sorry for replay being late.
The tlog file stay there for one week and seems no decease. Most of them
are 3~5 MB and totally 40MB.
The article your point I've read many times but no working. Everytime I
reindex files solr generate many tlog of them and no matter how many hard
commit I di
On 11/5/2013 5:14 PM, Mark wrote:
Can you configure the number of shards per collection or is this a system wide
setting affecting all collections/indexes?
The collections API has a CREATE action. You can specify numShards as a
parameter. This is better that defining numShards as a java sys
On 11/5/2013 3:36 PM, Scott Schneider wrote:
I'm wondering if filter queries are efficient enough for my use cases. I have
lots and lots of users in a big, multi-tenant, sharded index. To run a search,
I can use an fq on the user id and pass in the search terms. Does this scale
well with th
Can you configure the number of shards per collection or is this a system wide
setting affecting all collections/indexes?
Thanks
I want to provide my visitors with a price range slider when they can easily
filter on a min and max value. For this I need to know the lowest and
highest price of all the products found by my solr query.Since this is
dynamic, based on the query by the user, I can not simply get the min and
max val
By default solr sorts facets by the amount of hits for each result. However,
I want to sort by facetnames alphabetically. Earlier I sorted the facets on
the client or via my .NET code, however, this time I need solr to return the
results with alphabetically sorted facets directly.
How?
--
View t
Hi Alvaro,
Could you please point me to some link from where I can see how to index
two documents separately (joined by foreign keys).
Or if you can oblige by putting down some details here itself.
*For example*, say if user has entities like :
car {id:5, color:red, year:2004, companyId:23, ow
Hi all,
I'm wondering if filter queries are efficient enough for my use cases. I have
lots and lots of users in a big, multi-tenant, sharded index. To run a search,
I can use an fq on the user id and pass in the search terms. Does this scale
well with the # users? I suppose that, since user
On 11/5/2013 10:16 AM, Luis Cappa Banda wrote:
I have a master-slave replication (Solr 4.1 version) with a 30 seconds
polling interval and continuously new documents are indexed, so after 30
seconds always new data must be replicated. My test index is not huge: just
5M documents.
I have experime
Hi All,
Does setting 'facet.missing' to 'true' have any performance impact?
Andres
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/facet-missing-performance-tp4099477.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
It sounds like the characters were mishandled at index build time.
I would use Luke to see if a character that appear correctly
when you change the output to be SHIFT JIS is actually
stored as one Unicode. I bet it's stored as two characters,
each having the character of the value that happened
to
Hey All,
Using solr I want to get the difference between two dates, is this possible?
Something similar to
SELECT DateDiff(d, GetDate(), date_Field) as Diff FROM MyTable
I'm using Solr 1.4.1 and I have a table where the join colum is Oracle
RAW.Consider the next example and that id is of ORACLE RAW type. Does Solr
support this?
I tried it and the inner query doesn't work because the value passed
When you use a Transformer on a entity query does it also transform the value
if it's needed in a subentity query?
Considering the next example, the value ${outer.id} that is used in the "inner"
entity is affectd by the ClobTransformer?(ignore the fact that it doesn't make
sense to use a ClobTra
In my case, everytime I've used joins, the FROM field was a multivalued
string and the TO was an univalued string.
Regards.
El 05/11/2013 18:37, "Tech Id" escribió:
> I think Solr has the ability to do joins in the latest version as verified
> on this issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse
Are there any performance comparison results available comparing various
methods
to sort result by distance (not just filtering) on Solr 3 and 4?
We are using Solr 3.5 with Solr-2155 patch. I am particularly interested
in learning
performance difference among Solr 3 LatLongType, Solr-2155 GeoH
That was it, I had to restart Solr for the schema changes to take effect
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Can-t-find-some-fields-in-solr-result-tp4099245p4099446.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
One way to solve the issue may be to create another field to group the value in
a range, so you have fewer facet values to query.
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2013, at 4:31 AM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> You're just going to have to accept it being slow. Think of it this way:
> you have
> 4M (sa
I think Solr has the ability to do joins in the latest version as verified
on this issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3076
And some online resources point to this example:
http://blog.mikemccandless.com/2012/01/searching-relational-content-with.html
However, I am not sure if the abo
Hi,
I have been searching for an example of joins using solr/lucene.
But I have not found anything either on the net or in the src/examples.
Can someone please point me to the same?
Ideally, I need a join working with Solrj APIs (Please let me know if this
group is Lucene-specific).
Best Regard
Against --> again, :-)
2013/11/5 Luis Cappa Banda
> Hi guys!
>
> I have a master-slave replication (Solr 4.1 version) with a 30 seconds
> polling interval and continuously new documents are indexed, so after 30
> seconds always new data must be replicated. My test index is not huge: just
> 5M d
Hi guys!
I have a master-slave replication (Solr 4.1 version) with a 30 seconds
polling interval and continuously new documents are indexed, so after 30
seconds always new data must be replicated. My test index is not huge: just
5M documents.
I have experimented that a simple "q=*:*" query appear
Hi
I've been trying to play around with block join queries in the Solr 4.5
release and I was wondering if anyone else has any experience doing this?
Basically I'm trying to create a parent->child->grandchild structure and
then query to retrieve the parent documents. I can kinda get it to work on
t
I'm pleased to announce the release of Lux, version 0.11.2, the Dublin
edition.
There have been the usual round of bug fixes and enhancements, but the
main news with this release is the inclusion of support for SolrCloud.
You can now store and search XML documents in a distributed index using
We have a somewhat similar case; what we will do is to have one analysed
field in conjunction with a string field (possibly with case folding). That
way, we can use the original field values for displaying as facets, but
also allow searches for parts of the facet values.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 1:
1.4 is ancient, but you know that already :)
Anyway, what are your autocommit settings?
That vintage of Solr blocks indexing when committing
which may include rewriting the entire index.
So part of your regular slowdown is
likely segment merging happening with the
commit. The 14 hour cycle is
Whoops, looks like I misdiagnosed this one.
Just to add: you might want to make sure lazy field loading is enabled, too.
On Nov 5, 2013 7:21 AM, "Erick Erickson" wrote:
> As long as start=0, this is _not_ the deep paging problem.
>
> Raymond's comments are well taken. Try restricting the
> retur
If you're really bored, anything you'd like to do for SOLR-4779
would be great!
Best,
Erick
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 5:15 AM, Bram Van Dam wrote:
> On 11/04/2013 04:06 PM, Bill Bell wrote:
>
>> You could pre create a bunch of directories and base configs. Create as
>> needed. Then use schema les
It's great fun to watch Chris squirm in front of hundreds of people,
I highly recommend it!
Unfortunately, it's really hard to stump him entirely!
Erick
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
> (Note: cross posted announcement, please confine any replies to solr-user)
>
>
> H
You're just going to have to accept it being slow. Think of it this way:
you have
4M (say) buckets that have to be counted into. Then the top 500 have to be
collected to return. That's just going to take some time unless you have
very beefy machines.
I'd _really_ back up and consider whether this
There's no good way to do that that I know of. The problem is
that faceting occurs at an individual token level. If you use an
un-analyzed field, then you get facets that are the entire value,
but then you don't match non-exact, i.e. the "Ronald Wagner"
would not match "Wagner, Ronald S MD".
I don
As long as start=0, this is _not_ the deep paging problem.
Raymond's comments are well taken. Try restricting the
returned fields to only id. If you have large fields, Solr 4.1+
automatically compresses the data so you might be seeing
lots of time spent in decompression, that'd be my first guess.
Done. We had some problems with bots creating bogus
pages so unfortunately we had to lock the Wiki down.
But the bar to editing it is low, just ask so we're sure it's
a real person :).
Thanks for contributing!
Erick
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 5:53 AM, Jayson Minard wrote:
> Hi, so that I can edit
Are you restricting the set of fields that you return from the queries? If
not, it could be that you are returning fields that are potentially very
large, and may affect query performance that way.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:38 AM, michael.boom wrote:
> Thank you!
>
> I suspect that maybe my box
Solr's queryhandler statistics are pretty neat. Avg time per req, avg
requests in the last 5/15 min and so on.
But, when using SolrCloud's distributed search each core gets multiple
requests, making it hard to check which is the actual query time (the time
from when a leader gets the query request
(Note: cross posted announcement, please confine any replies to solr-user)
Hey folks,
On Wednesday, I'll be doing a "Stump The Chump" session at Lucene
Revolution EU in Dublin Ireland.
http://lucenerevolution.org/stump-the-chump
If you aren't familiar with "Stump The Chump" it is a Q&A s
Hi, so that I can edit the Solr WIKI (I previously could years ago, but not
now) ... please add me to the contributors group. Thanks!
username: JaysonMinard
-- jayson
Thank you!
I suspect that maybe my box was too small.
I'm upgrading my machines to more CPU & RAM and let's see how it goes from
there.
Would limiting the number of returned fields to a smaller value would make
any improvement?
The behaviour I noticed was that:
at start=o&rows=10 avg qtime after
On 11/04/2013 04:06 PM, Bill Bell wrote:
You could pre create a bunch of directories and base configs. Create as needed.
Then use schema less API to set it up ... Or make changes in a script and
reload the core..
I ended up creating a little API that takes schema/config as input,
creates the
All documents have been indexed with Solr 4.5.1.
Indeed in the process, some replicas died (replication error result of java
heap memory errors) the recovery process never ended and I need to restart the
node that store the replica in recovery mode.
The leader of the shard is the replica with l
Hi Eric,
You can use the CloudSolrServer which is zk aware and does a reasonable
amount of intelligent stuff for you.
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/4_5_0/solr-solrj/org/apache/solr/client/solrj/impl/CloudSolrServer.html
All it takes is the zk host address so you would not have to worry about
trac
Hi,
I'm currently using a SolrCloud setup with 3 nodes. The setup hosts about 50
(small) collections of a few thousand documents each. In the past, I've used
collections with replicationFactor = 3. So each node has a replica of all the
collections.
But now I want to add an extra node. Now, new
First time you run a query it's always slower, because it reads data from
disk.
After the first query, caches are built and stored in RAM memory, so the
second run of that query will hit caches and be sensibly faster.
To change how slow the first query is, play around with you firstSearcher
and ne
I previously made a post on this, but have since narrowed down the issue and am
now giving this another try, with another spin to it.
We are running a 4 node setup (over Tomcat7) with a 3-ensemble external
ZooKeeper. This is running no a total of 7 (4+3) different VMs, and each VM is
using our
51 matches
Mail list logo
