r/Support
>
> On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 4:59 AM, Asif Rahman wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Does anyone here have any experience hiring solr experts? Are there any
> > specific channels that you had good success with?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Asif
Hi all,
Does anyone here have any experience hiring solr experts? Are there any
specific channels that you had good success with?
Thanks,
Asif
--
Asif Rahman
Lead Engineer - NewsCred
a...@newscred.com
http://platform.newscred.com
and iostat. Recently
> http://www.newrelic.com/solr.html has been released
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-to-test-solr-s-performance-tp881928p885025.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--
ery by boosting date ranges.
>
> You would group in date ranges: documents in September would be
> boosted 1.0, October 2.0, November 3.0 etc.
>
>
> On 6/5/10, Asif Rahman wrote:
> > Thanks everyone for your help so far. I'm still trying to get to the
> bottom
>
at 9:17 AM, Robert Muir wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Asif Rahman wrote:
>
> > Perhaps I should have been more specific in my initial post. I'm doing
> > date-based boosting on the documents in my index, so as to assign a
> higher
> > score to more rece
//wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrRelevancyFAQ#How_can_I_boost_the_score_of_newer_documents
>
> Sorry, this doesn't answer your question, but does contribute the fact that
> some author of the FAQ at some point considered index-time boost not
> neccesarily unreasonable.
> ____
e concern.
>
> -Jay
> http://lucidimagination.com
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Asif Rahman wrote:
>
> > Perhaps I should have been more specific in my initial post. I'm doing
> > date-based boosting on the documents in my index, so as to assign a
> h
ntain this term more than other documents
> whose titles may match other parts of this query"
>
> HTH
> Erick
>
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Asif Rahman wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > What are the performance ramifications for using a function-base
ndering if I
would see a performance improvement by switching over to index-time
boosting.
Thanks,
Asif
--
Asif Rahman
Lead Engineer - NewsCred
a...@newscred.com
http://platform.newscred.com
I see that the entries for PorterStemFilterFactory,
EnglishPorterFilterFactory, and SnowballPorterFilterFactory have been
removed from the Analyzers, Tokenizers, and Token Filters wiki page. Is
there a reason for this?
Thanks,
asif
--
Asif Rahman
Lead Engineer - NewsCred
a...@newscred.com
r indexing
shape data?
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>
> On Feb 20, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Asif Rahman wrote:
>
> > One piece of functionality that I need is the ability to index a spatial
> > shape. I've begun implementing this for solr 1.4 using
t; is that any new APIs could change. Other than that, the usually advice
> applies: Test it out in your environment and see if it meets your needs.
> On the spatial stuff, we'd definitely appreciate feedback on performance,
> functionality, APIs, etc.
>
> -Grant
--
Asif Rahman
Lead Engineer - NewsCred
a...@newscred.com
http://platform.newscred.com
What is the prevailing opinion on using solr 1.5 in a production
environment? I know that many people were using 1.4 in production for a
while before it became an official release.
Specifically I'm interested in using some of the new spatial features.
Thanks,
Asif
--
Asif Rahman
sort
> order.
>
> Wojtek
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Facets-with-an-IDF-concept-tp24071160p24959192.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
--
Asif Rahman
Lead Engineer - NewsCred
a...@newscred.com
http://platform.newscred.com
I am limited to filtering by a single criterion for each of my
queries.
2) I could leave the Solr schema unmodified and post-process the query.
This solution is less elegant than one that could be completely contained
within Solr. I also imagine that it would be less performant.
Any thoughts?
t; by Solr, they are still left on the disk if at least one hard link to
> that
> > file exists. If you are looking for how to clean old snapshots, you could
> > use the snapcleaner script.
> >
> > Is that what you wanted to do?
> >
> > --
> > Rega
count is analogous to the tf and I can access the
facet term idf's through the Similarity API.
Is my reasoning sound? Can you provide any guidance as to the best way to
implement this?
Thanks for your help,
Asif
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>
> On Jun 23
we
> have full text for are not representative of the whole corpus)
>
> - if a searcher pages through to the 1000th result page, down to these
> less relevant results, should we somehow include these results in the
> facets we show?
>
> sorry, only more questions!
>
> Regards
Hi again,
I guess nobody has used facets in the way I described below before. Do any
of the experts have any ideas as to how to do this efficiently and
correctly? Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Asif
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Asif Rahman wrote:
> Hi all,
>
Hi all,
We have an index of news articles that are tagged with news topics.
Currently, we use solr facets to see which topics are popular for a given
query or time period. I'd like to apply the concept of IDF to the facet
counts so as to penalize the topics that occur broadly through our index.
I
I have been intending to although I have been dragging my feet on it. I've
never opened a bug before so I'm not sure of the protocol. If you don't
mind, it would be great if you could send me a pm and point me in the right
direction.
Thanks,
Asif
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Ensdorf Ken
Hi Otis,
Any documents marked deleted in this index are just the result of updates to
those documents. There are no purely deleted documents. Furthermore, the
field that I am ordering by in my function query remains untouched over the
updates.
I've read in other posts that the logic used by th
Hi all,
I'm having an issue with the order of my results when attempting to sort by
a function in my query. Looking at the debug output of the query, the score
returned with in the result section for any given document does not match
the score in the debug output. It turns out that if I optimiz
23 matches
Mail list logo
