On 1/24/2018 4:17 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
I ask because even if you are using the ClassicIndexSchemaFactory, your
update processor chain might be using TrimFieldUpdateProcessorFactory
and/or RemoveBlankFieldUpdateProcessorFactory ?
When i use the sample techproducts configs in 7.1, I have no
: I am converting a SOLR 4.10 db to SOLR 7.1
:
: It is NOT schemaless - so it uses a ClassicIndexSchemaFactory.
:
: In 4.10, I have a field that is a phone number (here's the schema information
for the field):
:
:
:
: When inserting documents into SOLR, there are some documents where the
:
Hi,
in a spellchecker call, if I don't get back collations object in the
response, is it correct to assume that even if I create a query myself by
joining the individually spell-corrected words in suggestions object in
response, it will have 0 results?
E.g. In the following spellchecker response
: We encountered an issue when using the refine parameter when subfaceting in
: a range facet.
: When enabling the refine option, the counts of the response are the double
: of the counts of the response without refine option.
: We are running Solr 6.6.1 in a cloud setup.
...
: If I execut
Alessandro,
Right. Solr's docnums are changed when segments merge and reordered.
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:15 PM, alessandro.benedetti
wrote:
> Hi Mikhail,
> but if he keeps the docs within a segment, the ordering may be correct just
> temporary right ?
> As soon as a segment merge happens ( for
I am converting a SOLR 4.10 db to SOLR 7.1
It is NOT schemaless - so it uses a ClassicIndexSchemaFactory.
In 4.10, I have a field that is a phone number (here's the schema information
for the field):
When inserting documents into SOLR, there are some documents where the value of
Phone is an
Given the technical nature of this problem? Do you think I should try
raising this on the developer group or raising a bug?
On 24 January 2018 at 12:36, Greg Roodt wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm trying to use the Query Eleveation Component in conjunction with
> CursorMark pagination. It doesn't seem to w
While upgrading our QA solr 6.1 solrclouds to Solr 7.2.0 I discovered that
some of our index folders for a replica had directory names like
index.20170830071504690
These replicas also had a file index.properties which indicates which index
directory is current.
We don't see this configuration in
I don't like that this behavior is not documented.
It appears from this that aliases are recursive (sort of) and that isn't
documented.
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 6:38 AM, alessandro.benedetti
wrote:
> b2b-catalog-material-etl -> b2b-catalog-material
> b2b-catalog-material -> b2b-catalog-material-1
Hi,
I am following the Solr documentation to configure ZK authentication and
ACLS from here
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/6_6/zookeeper-access-control.html
I am planning to go with MD5 Digest authentication mechanism
I am assuming that you still have to enable authentication on the Zookeep
Did some further digging and found that as grouping is enabled query result
cache is not having any inserts . Only disabling grouping adds an entry in
query result cache. Is there a way we can cache grouped results because as
per wiki there is parameter group.cache.percent but then again it doesnt
: Thanks Chris! Is RetrieveFieldsOptimizer a new functionality introduced in
: 7.x? Our observation is with botht 5.4 & 6.4. I have created a jira for
: the issue:
The same basic code path (related to stored fields) probably existed
largely as is in 5.x and 6.x and was then later refactored in
Hi
We are using Solr 6.6.2 version with 10g of memory (2 slaves and 1 master )
allocated to each and have around 30 docs. Our queries have
combinations of q, fq and facets with grouping enabled...
We have enabled filter cache and query result cache with 2048 entries.
Recently we performed a
This is actually an interesting point.
The original Solr score alone will mean nothing, the ranking position of the
document would be a more relevant feature at that stage.
When you put the original score together with the rest of features, it may
be of potential usage ( number of query terms, tf
Hi,
*Quick context of the application first.*
I am currently using Solr in standalone mode to index thousands of
text-like documents (not exactly textual documents).
A single document has a structure like following:
- *id* - unique file id
- *line_text* - textual data
- *file_local_url
have you tried adding the "distrib =true" request parameter when building the
suggester ?
It should be by default, but trying explicitly won't harm.
I think nowadays the suggester component is Solr Cloud compatible, I have no
chance to test it right now but it should just works.
Worst case you can
Hi Mikhail,
but if he keeps the docs within a segment, the ordering may be correct just
temporary right ?
As soon as a segment merge happens ( for example after sequent indexing
sessions or updates) the internal Lucene doc Id may change and the default
order Solr side may change, right ?
I am just
I think this has nothing to do with LTR in particular.
have you tried executing the function query on its own ?
I think it doesn't exist at all, right ? [1]
So maybe the first approach to that would be to add this nested children
function query capability to Solr.
I think there is a document Trans
b2b-catalog-material-etl -> b2b-catalog-material
b2b-catalog-material -> b2b-catalog-material-180117
and we do a data load to b2b-catalog-material-etl
We see data being added to both b2b-catalog-material and
b2b-catalog-material-180117 -> *in here you wanted just to index in
b2b-catalog-mate
Hi,
let me see if I got your problem :
your "user specific" features are Query dependent features from Solr side.
The value of this feature depends on a query component ( the user Id) and a
document component( product Id)
You can definitely use them.
You can model this feature as a binary feature.
I have never been a big fan of " getting N results from Solr and then filter
them client side" .
I get your point about the document modelling, so I will assume you properly
tested it and having the small documents at Solr side is really not
sustainable.
I also appreciate the fact you want to fin
Hi,
We encountered an issue when using the refine parameter when subfaceting in
a range facet.
When enabling the refine option, the counts of the response are the double
of the counts of the response without refine option.
We are running Solr 6.6.1 in a cloud setup.
If I execute the query:
curl
Exactly. I want to validate each lucene document with the query and discard the
ones that don't match.
Regards,
Rahul
-Original Message-
From: Diego Ceccarelli (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON) [mailto:dceccarel...@bloomberg.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 7:35 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.or
Hi,
Can you explain a bit more what is the issue? If you are talking of paging
results, then it depends on your presentation layer - you can include facet
numbers when returning the first page or ask for facets separately and for the
next page you do not return facets and only refresh results. O
24 matches
Mail list logo
