> Solr & Elasticsearch Consulting Support Training - http://sematext.com/
>
>
>
>> On 21 Nov 2017, at 16:30, Barbet Alain wrote:
>>
>> $ cat add_test.sh
>> DATA='
>>
>>
>>666
>>toto titi tata toto tutu titi
>&
s it sound normal ?
2017-11-21 11:43 GMT+01:00 Barbet Alain :
> Hi,
>
> I build a custom analyzer & setup it in solr, but doesn't work as I expect.
> I always get 1 as frequency for each word even if it's present
> multiple time in the text.
>
> --
> Monitoring - Log Management - Alerting - Anomaly Detection
> Solr & Elasticsearch Consulting Support Training - http://sematext.com/
>
>
>
>> On 21 Nov 2017, at 11:43, Barbet Alain wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I build a custom analyzer & setup it
Hi,
I build a custom analyzer & setup it in solr, but doesn't work as I expect.
I always get 1 as frequency for each word even if it's present
multiple time in the text.
So I try with default analyzer & find same behavior:
My schema
alian@yoda:~/solr> cat add_test.sh
DATA='
Hi !
I was previously using field(..) to escape some parameter on field name.
Like this:
fl=field(my:data)
Not good to use it on binary data as you will get "Can't initialize
DocTermsIndex to generate (function) FunctionValues for field:
my:data"
So now I use
fl=my*data
And it work's like a c
7-08-18 6:01 GMT+02:00 GW :
> Had the same issue with long base64_encoded images. Binary & string failed.
> Set my field type to field type ignored. Doesn't seem right (or wrong) but
> it worked.
>
> On 17 August 2017 at 03:58, Rick Leir wrote:
>
>> On 2017-08-12
't change this & reindex the stuff ...
Any other idea ?
2017-08-11 23:55 GMT+02:00 Dave :
> Why didn't you set it to be indexed? Sure it would be a small dent in an index
>
>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 5:20 PM, Barbet Alain wrote:
>>
>> Re,
>> I take a l
hasDocValues() is false as binary),
this test fail.
Ok but so, what is the way to get this field as I can see it in Luke
(in hex format) ?
2017-08-11 15:41 GMT+02:00 Barbet Alain :
> Hi !
>
>
> I've a Lucene base coming from a C++ program linked with Lucene++, a
> port of Lucen
Hi !
I've a Lucene base coming from a C++ program linked with Lucene++, a
port of Lucene 3.5.9. When I open this base with Luke, it show Lucene
2.9. Can see a binary field I have in Luke, with data encoded in
base64.
I have upgrade this base from 2.9 => 4.0 => 5.0 =>6.0 so I can use it
with Sol
