Hi,
I have two documents indexed.
With following query I am getting a search result based on AND clauses.
*ab:(system entity)* : Number of results returned 1, as expected.
*ab:(system entity)* *AND ab:authorization* : Number of results returned 1,
as expected.
But following query returns a diffe
Hi All,
I am using the Direct Spell checker component and I have collate =true in
my solrconfig.xml.
The issue that I noticed is that , when I have a search term with upto two
words in it and if both of them are misspelled I get a collation query as
a suggestion in the spellchecker output, if I
: text in it, query is of the type "keywords:(word1 OR word2 ... OR wordN)".
: The client is relying on default relevancy based sort returned by solr.
: Some documents can get penalised because of some other documents which were
: deleted. Is this functionality correct?
yes, because term stats ar
OK lets for a moment forget about this specific use case and consider a
more general case. Lets say the field name is "keywords" are we are storing
text in it, query is of the type "keywords:(word1 OR word2 ... OR wordN)".
The client is relying on default relevancy based sort returned by solr.
Some
: Currently we are not using SolrJ but are simply interacting with solr with
: json over http, this will change in a couple of months but currently not
: there. As of now we are putting all the logic in query building, using it
: to query solr and then passing on the json returned by it to front e
I have a large SolrCloud collection that I'm trying to add replicas for
existing shards. I've tried both the Collections API via ADDREPLICA:
curl "
http://collection1-2d.i.corp:8983/solr/admin/collections?action=ADDREPLICA&collection=insights1&shard=1402358400&node=collection1-2d.i.corp:8983_solr
Currently we are not using SolrJ but are simply interacting with solr with
json over http, this will change in a couple of months but currently not
there. As of now we are putting all the logic in query building, using it
to query solr and then passing on the json returned by it to front end. I
kno
Hi,
I see similar problem in our solr application. Sometime it gives number in a
group as number of all documents. This starting to happen after upgrade from
4.6.1 to 4.8.1
Thanks.
Alex.
-Original Message-
From: 海老澤 志信
To: solr-user
Sent: Tue, Jun 17, 2014 5:24 am
Subject: RE: gr
All index wide statistics (like the docFreq of each term) are over the
entire index, which includes deleted docs -- because it's an *inverted*
index, it's not feasible to update those statistics to account for deleted
docs (that would basically kill all the performance advantages thatcome
from
Thanks Michael. This indeed had something to do with environment. mvn
test is running the test case without properly initialized environment.
Once I added System.setProperty( "java.home" , "/opt/jdk.../jre/" ) ; - it
started found the currency.data and moved on
So it is clearly not solr - bu
Clearly you're going to need to deposit 25 cents to make that call. :)
More seriously, I'm wondering if most of the issue is environment-related,
since it seems like it's looking for that file on your system based on the
path. I checked my machine and it doesn't have a
$JAVA_HOME/lib/currency.data
Hi
I am using solrj 4.6 for accessing solr 4.6.As a test case for my
application, I created a servlet which holds the SolrJ connection via
zookeeper.
When I run the test, I am getting a weird stack trace. The test fails on
not finding a currency file of java. This file I believe used to be
I really have to ask why you want to search for apostrophes. Usually
these are considered junk characters and are best ignored.
Best,
Erick
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 6:03 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 6/16/2014 11:34 PM, Gaurav Deshpande wrote:
>> I want to perform name searches in Solr on String a
Personally, although I understand the rationale and performance
ramifications of the current approach of including deleted documents, I
would agree that DF and IDF should definitely be accurate, despite
deletions. So, if they aren't, I'd suggest filing a bug Jira. Granted it
might be rejected a
Will try optimizing and then respond to the thread.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Markus Jelsma
wrote:
> Yes, it is unique but they are not immediately purged, only when
> `optimized` or forceMerge or during regular segment merges. The problem is
> that they keep messing with the statistics.
Yes, it is unique but they are not immediately purged, only when `optimized` or
forceMerge or during regular segment merges. The problem is that they keep
messing with the statistics.
-Original message-
> From:Apoorva Gaurav
> Sent: Tuesday 17th June 2014 17:16
> To: solr-user ; Ahmet
Yes we have updates on these. Didn't try optimizing will do. But isn't the
unique field supposed to be unique?
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Ahmet Arslan
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just a guess, do you have deletions? What happens when you optimize and
> re-try?
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 5:58
Hi,
Just a guess, do you have deletions? What happens when you optimize and re-try?
On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 5:58 PM, Apoorva Gaurav
wrote:
Hello All,
We are using solr 4.4.0. We have a uniqueKey of type solr.StrField. We need
to extract docs in a pre-defined order if they match a certain c
Hi - did you perhaps update on of those documents?
-Original message-
> From:Apoorva Gaurav
> Sent: Tuesday 17th June 2014 16:58
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: docFreq coming to be more than 1 for unique id field
>
> Hello All,
>
> We are using solr 4.4.0. We have a un
Hello All,
We are using solr 4.4.0. We have a uniqueKey of type solr.StrField. We need
to extract docs in a pre-defined order if they match a certain condition.
Our query is of the format
uniqueField:(id1 ^ weight1 OR id2 ^ weight2 . OR idN ^ weightN)
where weight1 > weight2 > > weig
Dear Alexandre,
Yeah I saw that, but what is the best way of doing that from the
performance point of view?
I think of one solution myself:
Suppose we have a RDBMS for users that contains the category and group for
each user. (It could be in hierarchical format) Suppose there is a field
name "secur
On 6/16/2014 11:34 PM, Gaurav Deshpande wrote:
> I want to perform name searches in Solr on String and text datatypes but
> names contain apostrophes in it.
>
> Is there a way I can escape these apostrophes and perform searches ?
>
> Using '\' before apostrophe results in forbidden access due to
Hi all
Could anyone have comments on my bug report?
Regards,
Ebisawa
>-Original Message-
>From: 海老澤 志信
>Sent: Friday, June 13, 2014 7:45 PM
>To: 'solr-user@lucene.apache.org'
>Subject: group.ngroups is set to an incorrect value - specific field types
>
>Hi,
>
>I'm using Solr version 4.1
Have you looked at Post Filters? I think this was one of the use cases.
An old article:
http://java.dzone.com/articles/custom-security-filtering-solr . Google
search should bring a couple more.
Regards,
Alex.
Personal website: http://www.outerthoughts.com/
Current project: http://www.solr-star
Dears,
Hi,
I am going to apply customer security filtering for each document per each
user. (using custom profile for each user). I was thinking of adding user
fields to index and using solr join for filtering. But It seems for
distributed solr this is not a solution. Could you please tell me what
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Daniel Collins wrote:
> I confess we had upgraded to 4.8.1 and totally missed these warnings! I'm
> guessing they might be related to the ManagedIndexSchemaFactory stuff,
> which is commented out in the example configs. We don't use any of the
> REST stuff ourse
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Ahmet Arslan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think it would attract more attention if title mentions about 'managed
> resource warn logs' or something like that.
Too late for that, unless you suggest opening a new thread :)
Thanks for the tip,
Marius
>
> AHmet
>
> On Tuesd
I confess we had upgraded to 4.8.1 and totally missed these warnings! I'm
guessing they might be related to the ManagedIndexSchemaFactory stuff,
which is commented out in the example configs. We don't use any of the
REST stuff ourselves, so I can't comment any further.
I think you are ok as long
Hi,
I want to highlight the search results without using Highlighligting
Parameters provided by Solrnet. following is my configuration for
highlighting parameters.
Here is my Schema.xml
Following is configuration for solrconfig.xml
on
fulltext title
html
simple
s
0
title
0
title
Hi,
I developed application to show suggestions. Whenever i search for a query
if exact match found in solr it is showing. But if exact matches are not
there in solr then it showing irrelevant results.
My requirement is to show relevant results to user if the exact match is not
found.
And if qu
30 matches
Mail list logo
