;RoC" matches?
-Mensagem original-
De: Frederico Azeiteiro [mailto:frederico.azeite...@cision.com]
Enviada: quarta-feira, 28 de Novembro de 2012 17:19
Para: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Assunto: RE: Search differences between solr 1.4.0 and 3.6.1
Ok, I'll test that and let you know
Ok, I'll test that and let you know.
Is there some test I can easily do to confirm that is was really a side-effect
of the bug?
Frederico Azeiteiro
Developer
-Mensagem original-
De: Jack Krupansky [mailto:j...@basetechnology.com]
En
g, but
don't have any good clue
Best
Erick
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:34 AM, Frederico Azeiteiro <
frederico.azeite...@cision.com> wrote:
> I just reload both indexes just to make sure that all definitions are
> loaded.
> On Analysis tool I can see differences, even that
e
you are doing what you think? The generateNumberParts=0 keeps the '12'
from making it through the filter in 1.4 and 3.6 so I suspect you're not quite
doing something the same way in both.
Perhaps looking at index tokenization in one and query in the other?
Best
Erick
On Mon, Nov
@lucene.apache.org
Assunto: Re: Error loading class solr.CJKBigramFilterFactory
I'm sure. I added it to 3.6 ;)
You must have something funky with your tomcat configuration, like an exploded
war with different versions of jars or some other form of jar hell.
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Frederico Azei
solr.CJKBigramFilterFactory
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Frederico Azeiteiro
wrote:
> Fo make some further testing I installed SOLR 3.5.0 using default
> Jetty server.
>
> When tried to start SOLR using the same schema I get:
>
>
>
> SEVERE: org.apache.solr.common.Solr
Hi,
I've been testing some CJK tokenizers and I manage to get acceptable
results using:
Hi all,
Just testing SOLR 3.5.0. and notice a different behavior on this new
version:
select?rows=10&q=sig%3a("54ba3e8fd3d5d8371f0e01c403085a0c")&?
this query returns no results on my indexes, but works for SOLR 1.4.0
and returns "Java heap space java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java he
Hello all,
When moving a SOLR index to another instance I lost the files:
segments.gen
segments_xk
I have the .cfs file complete.
What are my options to recover the data.
Any ideia that I can test?
Thank you.
Frederico Azeiteiro
2011 10:11
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Using MLT feature
Couldn't you extend the TextProfileSignature and modify the TokenComparator
class to use lexical order when token have the same frequency ?
Ludovic.
2011/4/8 Frederico Azeiteiro [via Lucene] <
ml-node+2794604-1
oken count.
Ludovic.
2011/4/7 Frederico Azeiteiro [via Lucene] <
ml-node+2790579-1141723501-383...@n3.nabble.com>
> Well at this point I'm more dedicated to the Deduplicate issue.
>
> Using a Min_token_len of 4 I'm getting nice comparison results. MLT
returns
> a lot of simi
r@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Using MLT feature
A "fuzzy signature" system will not work here. You are right, you want
to try MLT instead.
Lance
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Frederico Azeiteiro
wrote:
> Yes, I had already check the code for it and use it to compile a c# method
Jelsma [mailto:markus.jel...@openindex.io]
Sent: terça-feira, 5 de Abril de 2011 15:20
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Cc: Frederico Azeiteiro
Subject: Re: Using MLT feature
If you check the code for TextProfileSignature [1] your'll notice the init
method reading params. You can set those pa
essor tag.
Best regards,
Frederico
-Original Message-
From: Markus Jelsma [mailto:markus.jel...@openindex.io]
Sent: terça-feira, 5 de Abril de 2011 12:01
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Cc: Frederico Azeiteiro
Subject: Re: Using MLT feature
On Tuesday 05 April 2011 12:19:33 Fred
at these parameters can help creating the same sig for
the above example?
Is anyone using the TextProfileSignature with success?
Thank you,
Frederico
-Original Message-
From: Markus Jelsma [mailto:markus.jel...@openindex.io]
Sent: segunda-feira, 4 de Abril de 2011 16:47
To: solr-user@
d the article.
2. Before adding the doc, create a signature (using the same algorithm that
SOLR uses) on my indexing app and then verify if signature exists before adding.
I'm way thinking the right way here? :)
Thank you,
Frederico
-Original Message-----
From: Frederico
ks even if the medianame should be an exact match (not similar match
as the headline and bodytext are)?
Thank you for your help,
____
Frederico Azeiteiro
Developer
-Original Message-
From: Markus Jelsma [mailto:markus.jel...@openindex.io]
Sen
ent if you don't want to index
exact.Similar though, I think has to be based off a document in the
index.
On Apr 4, 2011, at 5:16, Frederico Azeiteiro
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I would like to hear your opinion about the MLT feature and if it's a
> good solution to w
r? Is it a good approach? Are there
a better way to perform this comparison?
Thank you for your help.
Best regards,
____
Frederico Azeiteiro
arching for "Inter AND Continental" the article is returned
When searching for "InterContinental" the article is NOT returned
Can anyone explains why the last search didn't return the article?
Thank you,
Frederico Azeiteiro
proach to go ahead to support these functionalities?
thanks
Mark
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Frederico Azeiteiro <
frederico.azeite...@cision.com> wrote:
> Thanks for you ideia.
>
> At this point I'm logging each query time. My ideia is to divide my
> queries into "normal
cominvent.com
Training in Europe - www.solrtraining.com
On 11. aug. 2010, at 13.02, Frederico Azeiteiro wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I have on my schema
>
> default="NOW" />
>
>
>
> This field is returned as
>
> 2010-08-11T10:11:03.354Z
>
>
Hi,
I have on my schema
This field is returned as
2010-08-11T10:11:03.354Z
For an article added at 2010-08-11T11:11:03.354Z!
And the server has the time of 2010-08-11T11:11:03.354Z...
This is a w2003 server using solr 1.4.
Any guess of what could be wrong here?
Tha
rd3". After this is working, I'll try to optimize the "heavy queries"
Frederico
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Rochkind [mailto:rochk...@jhu.edu]
Sent: quarta-feira, 4 de Agosto de 2010 01:41
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: wildcard and proximity searche
Hi Ahmet,
> a) I think wildcard search is by default "case sensitive"?
> Is there a
> way to make case insensitive?
>>Wildcard searches are not analyzed. To case insensitive search you can
lowercase query terms >>at client side. (with using lowercasefilter at
index time) e.g. Mail* => mail*
>
> I
Hi Ahmet,
Thank you. I'll be happy to test it if I manage to install it ok.. I'm a
newbie at solr but I'm going to try the instructions in the thread to
load it.
Another doubts I have about wildcard searches:
a) I think wildcard search is by default "case sensitive"? Is there a
way to make case
Hi,
What approach shoud I use to perform wildcard and proximity searches?
Like: "solr mail*"~10
For getting docs where solr is within 10 words of "mailing" for
instance?
Thanks,
Frederico
Hi again,
I change the search options to decrease my query size and now I get
passed the URI too long from the other thread.
I already added :
819200
819200
On Jetty config but now I'm stucked again on:
13/Jul/2010 9:41:38 org.apache.solr.common.SolrException log
SEVERE: java.lang.Null
Ok, I posted on SOLRNet forum asking how can I reduce the URL string
using POST method.
But I'm giving a try to SOLRJ. Think should be the right way to do it
maybe.
-Original Message-
From: Mauricio Scheffer [mailto:mauricioschef...@gmail.com]
Sent: segunda-feira, 12 de Julho de 2010 14
Not an option because the query has other fields to query also.
They are generated throw a list choices (that could go to 5000's string
with 7 char each..).
I don't know is this could be considered off-topic (please advise...)
but:
i'm doing some test with lucene (Lucene.Net 2.9.2) but the result
re,
We had a similar issue. It's an easy fix, simply change the request type
from GET to POST.
Jon
On 12 Jul 2010, at 11:18, Frederico Azeiteiro wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I need to perform a search using a list of values (about 2000).
>
>
>
> I'm usin
...@vyre.com]
Sent: segunda-feira, 12 de Julho de 2010 11:56
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Query: URl too long
Hi there,
We had a similar issue. It's an easy fix, simply change the request type
from GET to POST.
Jon
On 12 Jul 2010, at 11:18, Frederico Azeiteiro wrote:
> Hi,
>
Hi,
I need to perform a search using a list of values (about 2000).
I'm using SolrNET QueryInList function that creates the searchstring
like:
"fieldName: value1 OR fieldName: value2 OR fieldName: value3..." (2000
values)
This method created a string with about 100 000 chars and the
ikely due to:
EnglishPorterFilterFactory
RemoveDuplicatesTokenFilterFactory
StopFilterFactory
you get those "fake" matches. try going into the admin, on the analysis
section. in there you can "simulate" the index/search of a document, and see
how its actually searched/indexed. it will give you some c
For the example given, I need the full expression "paying for it", so
yes all the words.
-Original Message-
From: Ahmet Arslan [mailto:iori...@yahoo.com]
Sent: sexta-feira, 2 de Julho de 2010 12:30
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: steps to improve search
> I need to know how t
rove search
No, you explained alright, but then didnt understand the answer. Searching
with the " surrounding the text you are searching for, has exactly the
effect you are looking for. try it...
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Frederico Azeiteiro <
frederico.azeite...@cision.com> w
g these filters.
-Original Message-
From: Leonardo Menezes [mailto:leonardo.menez...@googlemail.com]
Sent: sexta-feira, 2 de Julho de 2010 12:07
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: steps to improve search
Try
field:"text to search"
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Frederico Aze
Hi,
I'm using the default text field type on my schema.
Is there a quick way to do more accurate searches like searching for
"paying for it" only return docs with the full expression "paying for
it", and not return articles with word "pay" as it does now?
Thanks,
Frederico
HREAD DUMP" for something like "Lucene Merge
Thread". If its there, then optimize is still running. Also, index-filesize
and filenames in your index-dir are changing a lot...
On Tuesday 29 June 2010 12:54:54 Frederico Azeiteiro wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm using solr1.4.0 defaul
hanks,
Frederico Azeiteiro
Hi Ahmed,
I need to achieve that also. Do you manage to install it as service and
start solr with Jetty?
After installing and start jetty as service how do you start solr?
Thanks,
Frederico
-Original Message-
From: S Ahmed [mailto:sahmed1...@gmail.com]
Sent: segunda-feira, 3 de Maio de
Hi all,
Is it possible search for a combination of words within the same
sentence or paragraph?
Ex: American and McDonalds
Returns : "McDonalds is a American company"
Don't returns: "...went to McDonalds. After that se saw the American
flag..."
Is
, Mar 11, 2010 at 1:46 AM, Frederico Azeiteiro
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm having timeouts commiting on a 125 GB index with about 2200
> docs.
>
>
>
> I'm inserting new docs every 5m and commiting after that.
>
>
>
> I would like to try the autocommi
Hi,
I'm having timeouts commiting on a 125 GB index with about 2200
docs.
I'm inserting new docs every 5m and commiting after that.
I would like to try the autocommit option and see if I can get better
results. I need the docs indexed available for searching in about 10
minutes after
Thanks Chris.
Could something like that be implemented in c# ? :)
Does anyone has any link where I can start digging?
This is not an urgent matter, just something to investigate and implement in a
near future.
Frederico
-Original Message-
From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@f
Hi,
I need to implement a search where i should count the number of times
the string appears on the search field,
ie: only return articles that mention the word 'HP' at least 2x.
I'm currently doing this after the SOLR search with my own methods.
Is there a way that SOLR does this type of
Hi,
I'm using the default "text" field type that comes with the example.
When searching for simple words as 'HP' or 'TCS' solr is returning
results that contains 'HP1' or 'T&CS'
Is there a solution for to avoid this?
Thanks,
Frederico
ook at
some other client like solr.net: http://code.google.com/p/solrnet/. Disclaimer:
I haven't evaluated solr.net myself but it looks to be more robust than solr#
and is more actively maintained than solr#.
S
-Original Message-
From: Frederico Azeiteiro
To: solr-user@lucene.a
Hi,
I don't know if this list includes this kind of help, but I'm using
Solrsharp with C# to operate SOLR. Please advise if this is off-topic
please.
I'm having a little trouble to make a search with exclude terms using
the query parameters.
Does anyone uses Solrsharp around here? Do yo
Hi,
If i change the "defaultSearchField" in the core schema, do I need to
recreate the index?
Thanks,
Frederico
I've analyzed my index application and checked the XML before executing the
http request and the field it's empty:
It should be empty on SOLR.
Probably something in the way between my application (.NET) and the SOLR (Jetty
on Ubuntu) adds the whitespace.
Anyway, I'll try to remove the field
XML update. I'm serializing the doc in .NET, and then using solsharp to
insert/update the doc to SOLR.
The result is:
Dows this means I'm adding a whitespace on XML Update?
Frederico
-Original Message-
From: Ahmet Arslan [mailto:iori...@yahoo.com]
Sent: quinta-feira, 4 de
Theoretically yes,it's correct, but i have about 1/10 of the docs with
this field not empty and the rest is empty.
Most of the articles have the field empty as I can see when query *:*.
So the queries don't make sense...
-Original Message-
From: Ankit Bhatnagar [mailto:abhatna...@vantage
are really
all docs with field not empty?
Thanks again,
Frederico
-Original Message-
From: Frederico Azeiteiro [mailto:frederico.azeite...@cision.com]
Sent: quinta-feira, 4 de Fevereiro de 2010 10:55
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: query all filled field?
Thanks, bu
com]
Sent: quinta-feira, 4 de Fevereiro de 2010 05:38
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: query all filled field?
Queries that start with minus or NOT don't work. You have to do this:
*:* AND -fieldX:[* TO *]
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:04 AM, Frederico Azeiteiro
wrote:
> Hum, str
Hum, strange.. I reindexed some docs with the field corrected.
Now I'm sure the field is filled because:
"fieldX:(*a*)" returns docs.
But "fieldX:[* TO *]" is returning the same as "*.*" (all results)
I tried with "-fieldX:[* TO *]" and I get no results at all.
I wonder if someone has tried th
Ok, if anyone needs it:
I tried fieldX:[* TO *]
I think this is correct.
In my case I found out that I was not indexing this field correctly
because they are all empty. :)
-Original Message-
From: Frederico Azeiteiro [mailto:frederico.azeite...@cision.com]
Sent: quarta-feira, 3 de
Hi all,
Is it possible to query some field in order to get only not empty
documents?
All documents where field x is filled?
Thanks,
Frederico
k Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com]
Sent: 13 January 2010 13:33
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Problem comitting on 40GB index
That's my understanding.. But fortunately disk space is cheap
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 5:01 AM, Frederico Azeiteiro <
frederico.azeite...
Sorry, my bad... I replied to a current mailing list message only changing the
subject... Didn't know about this " Hijacking" problem. Will not happen again.
Just for close this issue, if I understand correctly, for an index of 40G, I
will need, for running an optimize:
- 40G if all activity on
nsights
Best
Erick
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Frederico Azeiteiro <
frederico.azeite...@cision.com> wrote:
> Hi Erik,
>
> I'm a newbie to solr... By IR, you mean searcher? Is there a place where I
> can check the open searchers? And rebooting the machine shou
dex size being
consumed if you also have a previous reader opened.
So I suspect that sometime recently you've opened another
IR.....
HTH
Erick
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Frederico Azeiteiro <
frederico.azeite...@cision.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I started working w
Hi all,
I started working with solr about 1 month ago, and everything was
running well both indexing as searching documents.
I have a 40GB index with about 10 000 000 documents available. I index
3k docs for each 10m and commit after each insert.
Since yesterday, I can't commit no articles to in
63 matches
Mail list logo