Hi,
I have confirmed that ZK ensemble is external. Even though both
managed-schema and schema.xml are on the admin ui, I see the below class
defined in solrconfig.
The workaround is till to run "solr zk upconfig" followed by restarting the
cores of the collection. Anything else I should be looki
This almost always means that you really _didn’t_ update the schema and reload
the collection, you just thought you did ;).
One common reason is to fire up Solr with an internal ZooKeeper but have the
rest of your collection be using an external ensemble.
Another is to be modifying schema.xml w
Because atomic updates require special preparation, specifically all original
fields must be stored which is not a requirement and is, in fact, an
anti-pattern in large installations.
Best,
Erick
> On Sep 4, 2019, at 7:51 PM, Arnold Bronley wrote:
>
> Why atomic indexing is not the default mo
Why atomic indexing is not the default mode of indexing in Solr? That way
the ownership model of the content changes from document level to field
level for clients. Multiple clients can participate in the contribution
process of the same Solr document without overwriting each other.
Hi Toke,
Please see below. We reindexed the solr8 cluster to make sure it was up to
date with content.
* What is your Xmx for the Solrs? -
solr8
SOLR_JAVA_MEM="-Xms11235m -Xmx11235m" - 70% of OS Memory
solr4
export CATALINA_OPTS="-Xms11235m -Xmx11235m" - - 70% of OS Memory
(If you use most
Hello, Adam.
It's hard to witness about 3.4, but that assert works on master
diff --git
a/solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/schema/ExternalFileFieldSortTest.java
b/solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/schema/ExternalFileFieldSortTest.java
index 632b413..4106e15 100644
---
a/solr/core/src/test/org/a
Hi,
I ran the collection reload after a new "leader" core was selected for the
collection due to heap failure on the previous core. But I still have stack
trace with common.SolrException: undefined field.
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 1:36 PM Antony A wrote:
> Yes. I do restart the cores on all the d
Hello Arnold,
Yes, we do this too for several cases.
You can create the SolrClient in the Factory's inform() method, and pass is to
the URP when it is created. You must implement SolrCoreAware and close the
client when the core closes as well. Use a CloseHook for this.
If you do not close the
Hi Simon,
I am interested in knowing what did you end up doing in your use-case then.
Can you please share it at least at high level?
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 2:26 PM Simon Rosenthal
wrote:
> Similarly, I had considered a URP which would call the Solr Tagger to add
> new metadata fields for inde
Hi Shawn,
Thank you for the feedback and advise. I have loaded the 2 screenshots up
to drop box. Here is the link.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/c5b41a61za0ojw7/solr4_Screen%20Shot%202019-09-03%20at%203.37.08%20PM.png?dl=0
Thank you,
*Manzama*a MODERN GOVERNANCE company
Russell Bahr
Lead Infrast
Similarly, I had considered a URP which would call the Solr Tagger to add
new metadata fields for indexing to incoming documents (and recall
discussing this with David Smiley), but eventually decided against this
approach on the grounds of complexity.
-Simon
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 2:10 PM Arnold
I need to search some other collection inside processAdd function and
append that information to the indexing request.
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 7:55 PM Erick Erickson
wrote:
> This really sounds like an XY problem. What do you need the SolrClient
> _for_? I suspect there’s an easier way to do this
Hi All,
We're running Solr 3.4 (I know, I know - we have another project to upgrade
this) and we have a fieldtype defined with an externalFileField as:
(Actually, I have tried this with both `stored="true"` and
`stored="false"`).
The field using this fieldtype is defined as:
> there are known perf issues in computing very large clusters
Is there any documentation/open tickets on this that you have handy? If that is
the case, then we might be back to looking at separate Znodes. Right now if we
provide a nodeset on collection creation, it is creating them quickly. I
I think you have to start from the lowest level and then go up the stack.
Solr uses Tika if you use extract handler (and for production you may
not want to)
Tika uses PDFBox to extract from PDF
Searching PDFBox remove headers gets you:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/18126035/how-to-remove-hea
On Sep 3, 2019, at 1:13 PM, Audrey Lorberfeld - audrey.lorberf...@ibm.com
wrote:
>
> The main issue we are anticipating with the above strategy surrounds scoring.
> Since we will be increasing the frequency of accented terms, we might bias
> our page ranker...
You will not be increasing the f
Thanks, Alex! We'll look into this.
--
Audrey Lorberfeld
Data Scientist, w3 Search
IBM
audrey.lorberf...@ibm.com
On 9/3/19, 4:27 PM, "Alexandre Rafalovitch" wrote:
What about combining:
1) KeywordRepeatFilterFactory
2) An existing folding filter (need to check it ignores Keyword
> On Sep 3, 2019, at 10:46 PM, Jörn Franke wrote:
>
> PDF is a problematic format as headers and footers are not specified per se
> as headers and footers in the document, but only as drawing instructions on
> the page. There is no chance for a software to find them based on the
> structure.
Hi Erick
Thanks for your help.
Before I visit wiki/maillist, I knew solr is unstable in 1000+ collections, and
should be safe in 10~100 collections.
But in a specific env, what's the exact number which solr begin to become
unstable? I don't know.
So I try to deploy a test cluster to get the num
On Tue, 2019-09-03 at 12:35 -0700, Russell Bahr wrote:
> Also, if it helps, the content on each server is between around 6.2Gb
> and 7.8Gb.
We're still missing something here. The trivial query
http://solr.obscured.com:8990/solr/content/select?q=*%3A*&wt=json&indent=true
on such a modest index si
20 matches
Mail list logo
