You absolutely follow my problem. I want to put Obama from espn atop just
because this is exceptional and probably interesting occurance. And the
score is low because content is long or there are no matches in title.
29.10.2012 23:18 пользователь "Chris Hostetter"
написал:
>
> You haven't really
Perhapse this is a XY problem.
First of all I don't have a site which I want to boost. All docs are equal.
Secondly I will explain what I have. I have 100 docs indexed. I do a query
which returns 10 found docs. 8 of them from one site and 2 from other
different sites. I dont like order. Technical
esults but shuffle them appropriately.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 29 October 2012 15:55, Erick Erickson wrote:
> I don't think you're reading the grouping right. When you use grouping,
> you get the top N groups, and within each group you get the top M
> scoring docum
Interesting but not exactly what I want to get.
If I group items then I will get small number of docs. I don't want this. I
need all of them.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 29 October 2012 12:05, yunfei wu wrote:
> Besides changing the scoring algorithm, what about "Fie
don't know why but doesn't work. :(
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 11 July 2012 23:54, Yury Kats wrote:
> On 7/11/2012 2:55 PM, Alexander Aristov wrote:
>
> > content:?? doesn't work :)
>
> I would try escaping them: content:\?\?\?\?\?\?
>
>
>
>
e in that sence that there must be no error especially such as
NPE.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 21 April 2012 03:42, Peter Markey wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have been trying out deduplication in solr by following:
> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/Deduplication. I have defined a sign
Hi
This is not solr format. You must re-format your XML into solr XML. you may
find examples on solr wiki or in solr examples dir.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 13 April 2012 23:13, srini wrote:
> Erick,
>
> Thanks for your reply. when you say Solr does not index arbitery xml
&
Ok. got it. thanks
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 2 April 2012 16:37, Erick Erickson wrote:
> You can't set the default operator for a single field. This implies
> you're using edismax? If that's the case, your app layer can
> massage the query to something like
>
!!! OFF TOPIC, srry
I cannot stand but I want to write this. Subject is very intriguing beacuse
of two meanings of the war word. :)
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 4 February 2012 01:50, Mark Miller wrote:
>
> On Feb 3, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Darren Govoni wrote:
>
> >
ts so
won't be able to check with heavier conditions.
If someone is interested I can send over my jar file with my update
processor.
As I said I am ready to contribute it to solr but will get back to it in
the New Year after 10 Jan.
thanks everybody.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 2
gards
Alexander Aristov
On 29 December 2011 17:03, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Hmmm, we're not communicating ...
>
> The update processor wouldn't search in the
> classic sense. It would just use lower-level
> index traversal to determine if the doc (identified
> by your uni
an what it means.
But I understand what it does in fact and so my way is to write custom
update processor plugin.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 28 December 2011 22:16, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
> : That said, writing your own update request handler
> : that detected this case i
Unfortunately I have a lot of duplicates and taking that searching might
suffer I will try with implementing update procesor.
But your idea is interesting and I will consider it, thanks.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 28 December 2011 19:12, Tanguy Moal wrote:
> Hello Alexander,
&g
Thanks Eric,
it sets me direction. I will be writing new plugin and will get back to the
dev forum with results and then we will decide next steps.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 28 December 2011 18:08, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Well, the short answer is that nobody else has
> 1&
the problem with dedupe (SignatureUpdateProcessor ) is that it REPLACES old
docs. I have tried it already.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 28 December 2011 13:04, Lance Norskog wrote:
> The SignatureUpdateProcessor is for exactly this problem:
>
>
> http://www.lucidimaginatio
2. overwrite=false and uniqueID exists then newer doc must be skipped since
old exists.
3. uniqueID doesn't exist then newer doc just gets added regardless if old
exists or not.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 27 December 2011 22:53, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Mikhail is right as f
rounds) to make
it working without codding, just by playing around with configuration and
params. I don't want to go away from default solr implementation.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 27 December 2011 09:33, Mikhail Khludnev wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:26 AM, Alexander Aristov
check if a doc to be added
is in the index already and do not add it to array but I have so many docs
that I am affraid it's not a good solution.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
ic responses or actions.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
Didn't get any responses.
But I tried luke 1.0.1 and it did the magic. I run optimization and after
that solr got up.
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
On 30 March 2011 15:47, Alexander Aristov wrote:
> People
>
> Is were way to upgrade existsing index from solr 1.4 to solr 4(tr
People
Is were way to upgrade existsing index from solr 1.4 to solr 4(trunk). When
I configured solr 4 and launched it complained about incorrect lucence file
version (3 instead of old 2)
Are there any procedures to convert index?
Best Regards
Alexander Aristov
21 matches
Mail list logo
