Re: retreive all the fields in join

Aman, The option you have got is: - write custom components like request handlers, collectors & response writers.. - first you would do the join, then apply the pagination - you will get the docList in response writer, you would need to make a call to the second core (you could be smart to use the

Re: Join solr

Can you describe what is your business requirement (how'z your data indexed, what is the request and what should be the response). and give us some examples. If you want to sort the results of the first core based on the sorting preference of the second core that you are joining with, that doesn't

Re: cache warming questions

put them in newSearcher queries. > > Best, > Erick > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Kranti Parisa > wrote: > > Erik, > > > > I have a followup question on this topic. > > > > If we have used 10 unique FQs and when we configure filterCache=100 & &

Re: cache warming questions

Erik, I have a followup question on this topic. If we have used 10 unique FQs and when we configure filterCache=100 & autoWarm=5, then which 5 out of the 10 will be repopulated in the case of new searcher? I don't think there is a way to set the preference or there is? Thanks, Kranti K. Parisa

Re: join and filter query with AND

ne. > Kranti, your suggestion was also good :-) > > Thanks a lot! > > > > On 21 March 2014 20:00, Kranti Parisa wrote: > > > My example should also work, am I missing something? > > > > &q=({!join from=inner_id to=outer_id fromIndex=othercore >

Re: join and filter query with AND

My example should also work, am I missing something? &q=({!join from=inner_id to=outer_id fromIndex=othercore v=$joinQuery})&joinQuery=(city:"Stara Zagora" AND prod:214) Thanks, Kranti K. Parisa http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: > Co

Re: join and filter query with AND

You may try this (({!join from=inner_id to=outer_id fromIndex=othercore v=$joinQuery} And pass another parameter joinQuery=(city:"Stara Zagora" AND prod:214) Thanks, Kranti K. Parisa http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 4:47 AM, Marcin Rzewucki wrote: > Hi, > > Eri

Re: Indexing huge data

thats what I do. precreate JSONs following the schema, saving that in MongoDB, this is part of the ETL process. after that, just dump the JSONs into Solr using batching etc. with this you can do full and incremental indexing as well. Thanks, Kranti K. Parisa http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa

Re: Does SolrCloud Improves Indexing or Slows it down

Why don't you do parallel indexing and then merge everything into one and replicate that from the master to the slaves in SolrCloud? Thanks, Kranti K. Parisa http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Susheel Kumar < susheel.ku...@thedigitalgroup.net> wrote: > Hi,

Re: Solr server requirements for 100+ million documents

can you post the complete solrconfig.xml file and schema.xml files to review all of your settings that would impact your indexing performance. Thanks, Kranti K. Parisa http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Susheel Kumar < susheel.ku...@thedigitalgroup.net> wr

Re: Changing Cache Properties after Indexing

Doesn't it make sense to have a Indexer, Query Engine setup? Indexer = Solr instance with replication configured as Master Query Engine = One or more Solr instances with replication configured as Slave So that, you can do batch indexing on the Indexer, perform threshold checks if needed by disabl

Re: Query time join with conditions

cool, np. Thanks, Kranti K. Parisa http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:30 AM, heaven wrote: > Nvm, figured it out. > > To match profiles that have "test entry" in own attributes or in related > rss > entries it is possible to use ({!join from=profile_ids_im to=i

Re: Query time join with conditions

you should be able to do the following /ProfileCore/select?q=*:*&fq={!join fromIndex=RssCore from=profile_id to=id v=$rssQuery}&rssQuery=(type:'RssEntry') There is also a new join impl https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4787 which allows you to use fq within join, which will support Nested

Re: Range queries with Grouping is slow?

d2:blort OR field1:blah > > will not match the first one. > > > > It kind of depends on the query pattern whether the filtercache will be > > re-used, you have to take care to construct the fq clauses with re-use in > > mind if you want ORs. > > > > Best, &

Re: Passing variables as values in Query Filter

did you try this? q={!func}customfunc($v1)&v1=somevalue&qf=fieldname more info http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery Thanks, Kranti K. Parisa http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 2:22 AM, Mukundaraman valakumaresan < muk...@8kmiles.com> wrote: > Hi Ahmet, > > Th

Re: Range queries with Grouping is slow?

he filtercache. And > fq=field2:blort OR field1:blah > will not match the first one. > > It kind of depends on the query pattern whether the filtercache will be > re-used, you have to take care to construct the fq clauses with re-use in > mind if you want ORs. > > Best, >

Re: Range queries with Grouping is slow?

ght also reduce the precisionStep > > value for the field you are using to 6 or even 4. But wow that's a big > > difference you noted; it wouldn't hurt to double-check with the debugger > > that the [* TO *] is treated as a numeric range query instead of a > generic &g

Range queries with Grouping is slow?

Is there any known issue with Range queries + grouping? Case1: q=id:123&group=true&sort=price asc&group.field=entityId&group.limit=2&group.ngroups=true Case2: q=id:123 AND price:[* TO *]&group=true&sort=price asc&group.field=entityId&group.limit=2&group.ngroups=true Index Size:10M/~5GB After run

Re: config JoinQParserPlugin

Ray, FYI: there are more sophisticated joins available via https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4787 not on trunk yet, but worth taking a look. Thanks, Kranti K. Parisa http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Ray Cheng wrote: > Hi Chris, > > > but also e

Re: dropping noise words and maintaining the relevancy

One possible approach is you can populate the titles in a field (say exactMatch) and point your search query to exactMatch:"160 Associates LP" OR text:""160 Associates LP" assuming that you have all the text populated into the field called "text" you can also use field level boosting with the abov