Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I am aware index format
is identical in either case.
One benefit of allowing one to specify a field as single-valued is similar to
specifying that a field is required: Providing a safeguard that index data
conforms to requirements. So maki
At 9:51 PM -0700 10/7/07, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>: Thanks for the pointer. After two silent days waiting for reply,
>: I decided to implement a command line for that. Works like a charm !!!
>
>well, sometimes people just don't post because they don't know the
>answer to something (better then 50
At 9:32 PM +1000 10/5/07, Adrian Sutton wrote:
>From what people are suggesting though you'd be better off converting to plain
>text before indexing it with Solr. Something like JTidy (http://jtidy.sf.net)
>can parse most HTML that's around and you can iterate over the DOM to extract
>the text f
At 3:45 PM -0700 10/4/07, Mike Klaas wrote:
>I'm actually somewhat surprised that several people are interested in this but
>none have have been sufficiently interested to implement a solution to
>contribute:
>
>http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-42
I just devised a workaround earlier in
At 12:13 PM -0400 9/27/07, Steven Rowe wrote:
>Chris Hostetter wrote:
>> : is there an analyzer which automatically converts all german special
>> : characters to their specific dissected from, such as ü to ue and ä to
>> : ae, etc.?!
>>
>> See also the ISOLatin1TokenFilter which does this regardle
At 5:30 PM +0200 9/20/07, Walter Ferrara wrote:
>I have an index with several fields, but just one stored: ID (string,
>unique).
>I need to access that ID field for each of the tops "nodes" docs in my
>results (this is done inside a handler I wrote), code looks like:
>
> Hits hits = searcher.se
Sometimes one has to make things work in the environment one is handed (e.g.
virtualized servers, ALL storage resources resident on a SAN and accessed via
NFS, read-only mounts on the deployment instances with only the production
indexers having write access). While I agree that fast local inde
Because "score desc" is the default Lucene & Solr behavior when no explicit
sort is specified, QueryParsing.parseSort() returns a null sort so that the
non-sort versions of the query execution routines get called. However the
caller SolrPluginUtils.parseSort issues that warning whenever it gets
Hi, Hoss.
I have a number of things I'd like to post... but the generally-useful stuff is
unfortunately a bit interwoven with the special-case stuff, and I need to get
out of breathing-down-my-back deadline mode to find the time to separate them,
clean up and comment, make test cases, etc. Hop
At 4:40 PM +0100 6/6/07, galo wrote:
>1. I want to use solr for some sort of live search, querying with incomplete
>terms + wildcard and getting any similar results. Radioh* would return
>anything containing that string. The DisMax req. hander doesn't accept
>wildcards in the q param so i'm tryi
At 4:29 PM -0400 5/15/07, Yonik Seeley wrote:
>On 5/15/07, bhecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>[...] the function parseRules in SynonymFilterFactory is private
>
>If you start using Solr's configuration, you drag more of Solr in.
>
>You can add the synonyms to the SynonymMap yourself, or if you wan
I wrote the following after hurriedly reading Grant Ingersoll's
question, and I completely missed the "to remove results that have
already been viewed" bit. Which leads me to think what I wrote may
have no bearing on this issue... but perhaps it may have bearing on
someone else's issue?
- J
Perhaps not relevant in this case, but for the record there is one more SOLR
behavior affected by multiValued:
3) when faceting, a multiValued field always uses the TermEnum algorithm
rather than the FieldCache algorithm.
depending on the data, this can have a dramatic effect on faceting perf
Hoss, I'm delighted to have annoyed you, if only *slightly*! ;-)
- J.J.
PS: +1 on Yonik's subsequent comment.
At 8:04 PM -0800 1/14/07, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>: - Apply the faceting criteria (e.g. facet.zeros, though facet.mincount
>: would have been a more flexible option in all cases)
>
>yo
At 5:06 AM -0500 1/12/07, Erik Hatcher wrote:
>What the user-interface needs is a way to ask Solr for terms that begin with a
>specified prefix, as the user types. Paging via start/rows is necessary, and
>also sorting by frequency given some specified constraints. I like the
>start/end term i
+2 cents:
At 2:43 PM +0530 1/9/07, Mekin Maheshwari wrote:
>In general I felt that smaller indexes with different requirements
>might be more flexible than 1 large index (Would a 3G index
>considered large ?). eg. backing up the index, deploying a fresh
>index, etc. But Solr does address most of
Andrew Nagy, ditto on what Yonik said. Here is some further elaboration:
I am doing much the same thing (faceting on Author etc.). When my Author field
was defined as a solr.TextField, even using solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory so it
wasn't actually tokenized, the faceting code chose the QueryFilt
based on actual query
results. Does anyone have any insight on how efficient that may or
may not be?
And if I have gotten something dreadfully wrong in my understanding
of current implementation or proposed enhancement, I would appreciate
getting straightened out.
Thanks,
J.J. Larrea
Regarding XML databases, there is an excellent open-source XML database 'eXist'
which currently uses indexes to speed up both structure-based and content-based
retrieval via XQuery; there are plans on their development roadmap to replace
parts of the indexing mechanism, particularly fulltext ana
19 matches
Mail list logo
