Thanks Kamal.
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Kamal Kishore Aggarwal <
kkroyal@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Apporva,
>
> This was my master server replication configuration:
>
> core/conf/solrconfig.xml
>
>
> >
> > commit
> > startup
> > ../data/external_eff_views
>
Hi Apporva,
This was my master server replication configuration:
core/conf/solrconfig.xml
>
> commit
> startup
> ../data/external_eff_views
>
>
It is only configuration files that can be replicated. So, when I wrote the
above config. The external files was g
Issue was closed in Jira requesting it be discussed here first. Looking for any diagnostic assistance on this issue with
4.8.0 since it is intermittent and occurs without warning.
Setup is two nodes, with external zk ensemble. Nodes are accessed round-robin
on EC2 behind an ELB.
Schema has:
Hello everyone :)
I have a product called "xbox" indexed, and when the user search for
either "x-box" or "x box" i want the "xbox" product to be
returned. I'm new to Solr, and from reading online, I thought I need
to use WordDelimiterFilterFactory for "x-box" case, and
WordBreakSolrSpellChecker f
So copyField it to another and apply alternative processing there. Use
eDismax to search both. No need to store the copied field, just index it.
Regards,
Alex
On 16/07/2014 2:46 am, "Hayden Muhl" wrote:
> Both fields? There is only one field here: username.
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 6:1
Thanks Jack!
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Usage-of-enablePositionIncrements-in-Stop-filter-tp4147321p4147352.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Both fields? There is only one field here: username.
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch
wrote:
> Search against both fields (one split, one not split)? Keep original
> and tokenized form? I am doing something similar with class name
> autocompletes here:
>
> https://github.c
It's a bug (file a Jira) that this Lucene (and Solr) feature is not
documented in the Lucene Javadoc for the stop filter factory.
But, I do have it fully documented, with examples, in my Solr Deep Dive
e-book:
http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/jack-krupansky/solr-4x-deep-dive-early-access-release
Hi,
Could anyone please explain me the usage of enablePositionIncrements in
StopFilterFactory. I have trying to search in on the forum as well as the
internet, but I cannot understand it. It would be great if anyone could help
me out with an example.
Thanks
--
View this message in context:
h
Guys, I found the explanation that i was looking for online.
http://docs.lucidworks.com/display/lweug/Suppressing+Stop+Word+Indexing
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Usage-of-enablePositionIncrements-in-Stop-filter-tp4147321p4147324.html
Sent from the Solr -
The contents of this email, including the attachments, are PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL to the intended recipient at the email address to which it has
been addressed. If you receive it in error, please notify the sender
immediately by return email and then permanently delete it from your system.
If you want to keep stopwords, take the stopword filter out of your analysis
chain.
wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/
On Jul 15, 2014, at 1:36 AM, Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote:
> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/lucene_solr_4_9_0/lucene/ana
Hello everyone. I'm emailing the group because we've encountered a number
of people at conferences (ApacheCon, LuceneRev, etc) that use Apache Camel
as their ingest pipeline for Solr. I've heard a number of folks discuss
their frustration with lack of SolrCloud support amongst other things in
Camel
Hi,
I want to boost recent (*today's*) documents having a certain *field value*.
The two fields to be bosted are respectively: '*date*' & '*site*'.
But I dont want to penalize *recent *documents not satisfying the field
value ('*site*'), in favor of *older* documents satisfying this field value
('*
You can use CloudSolrServer (if you're using Java) which will route
documents correctly to the leader of the appropriate shard.
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 3:04 PM, ian wrote:
> Hi Mark
>
> Thanks for replying to my post. Would you know whether my findings are
> consistent with what other people s
They should be same as long as the same group heads are selected with both
queries. The CollapsingQParserPugin simply collapses the result set and
then forwards to lower collectors, so the DocSet created should always be
for the collapsed set.
Joel Bernstein
Search Engineer at Heliosearch
On
Oops... forgot the link to the stop filter factory Javadoc:
http://lucene.apache.org/core/4_9_0/analyzers-common/org/apache/lucene/analysis/core/StopFilterFactory.html
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Jack Krupansky
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2014 7:42 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.ap
Yeah, this is another one of those places where the behavior of Solr is
defined but way down in the Lucene Javadoc, where no Solr user should ever
have to go!
It's also the kind of detail documented in my Solr Deep Dive e-book:
http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/jack-krupansky/solr-4x-deep-dive-ear
In fact its better using TrieIntField instead of IntField.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/201301.mbox/%3ccab_8yd9yp259kk4ciybbprjcpwqp6vd7yvrtjr1eubew_ky...@mail.gmail.com%3E
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13372323/what-is-the-correct-solr-fieldtype-to-use-for-sorting
Hi Mark
Thanks for replying to my post. Would you know whether my findings are
consistent with what other people see when using SolrCloud?
One thing I want to investigate is whether I can route my updates to the
correct shard in the first place, by having my client using the same hashing
logic a
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/lucene_solr_4_9_0/lucene/analysis/common/src/java/org/apache/lucene/analysis/core/StopAnalyzer.java#L51
If you don't set the attribute in XML file, it falls back to the
default definitions.
Personal: http://www.outerthoughts.com/ and @arafalov
Solr resour
Hi jack,
it will use the internal *Lucene hardwired list* of stop words
I am unaware of this, could you please provide the more information about
this.
With Regards
Aman Tandon
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 7:21 AM, Alexandre Rafalovitch
wrote:
> You could try experimenting with CommonGramsFilt
i think type="text_general" make it charactered-sort for numbers.
How about make it as type="int" or type="long" instead of "text_general"?
Regards,
suganuma
2014-07-15 16:24 GMT+09:00 madhav bahuguna :
> Iam trying to sort my records but the result i get is not correct
> My url qu
That's always what happens (not just in Solr) when you store numbers
as text. You could store them as text-sortable numbers with leading
zeros (e.g. 04 vs. 45), but then what happens when you hit a 100?
Alternatively, if that field has only numbers, index it as a numeric
type. Make sure to use one
Iam trying to sort my records but the result i get is not correct
My url query--
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?&q=*:*&fl=business_point&sort=business_point+desc
Iam trying to sort my records by business_points but the result i get is in
like this
9
8
7
6
5
45
4
4
10
1
Whys am i getting my re
25 matches
Mail list logo
