DollarDays.com is currently using it and we display the powered by logo
as at least a gesture of giving back to the community.
Ryan T. Grange, IT Manager
DollarDays International, Inc.
rgra...@dollardays.com (480)922-8155 x106
On 4/29/2010 11:10 AM, Daniel Baughman wrote:
Hi I'm new to the li
n Baer wrote:
Maybe some things to try:
* make sure your uniqueKey is string field type (ie if using int it will not
work)
* forceElevation to true (if sorting)
- Jon
On Mar 9, 2010, at 12:34 AM, Ryan Grange wrote:
Using Solr 1.4.
Was using the standard query handler, but needed the boost b
Using Solr 1.4.
Was using the standard query handler, but needed the boost by field
functionality of qf from dismax.
So we altered the query to boost certain phrases against a given field.
We were using QueryElevationComponent ("elevator" from solrconfig.xml)
for one particular entry we wanted
Not posting a problem or a solution. Just wanted to get word back to
the Solr developers, bug testers, and mailing list gurus how much I love
Solr 1.4. Our site search is more accurate, the search box offers
better suggestions must faster than before, and the elevate
functionality has appease
x106
Francis Yakin wrote:
DO you have experience to upgrade from 1.2.0 to 1.3.0?
In other words, do you have any suggestions or best if you have any docs or
instructions for doing this.
I appreciate if you can help me.
Thanks
Francis
-Original Message-
From: Ryan Grange [mailto:rgra
I disagree with waiting that month. At this point, most of the kinks in
the upgrade from 1.2 to 1.3 have been worked out. Waiting for 1.4 to
come out risks you becoming a guinea pig for the upgrade procedure.
Plus, if any show-stoppers come along delaying 1.4, you delay
implementation of you
It would help to see your query, but you basically add ",score" to
whatever you're sending over in the "fl" variable. If you aren't
passing "fl", you may want to use "fl=*,score".
Ryan T. Grange, IT Manager
DollarDays International, Inc.
rgra...@dollardays.com (480)922-8155 x106
ayyanar wro
I got around this problem by using a trigger on the table I index that
records the values of deleted items in a queue table so when my next
Solr update rolls around it sends a remove request for that record's
ID. Once the Solr deletion is done, I remove that ID from the queue
table. Of course
It would be nice to see some kind of update to the Solr website
regarding what's holding up a 1.3 release. I look at that a lot more
often than I look at this mailing list to see whether or not there's a
new version I should be looking to test out.
Ryan Grange, IT Manager
It's definitely not immutable. A while back I added DollarDays
International. Just remember to be polite and add yourself to the end
of the list.
Ryan Grange, IT Manager
DollarDays International, LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
480-922-8155 x106
oleg_gnatovskiy wrote:
Clay Webster wrote:
Solr does use 24 hour dates. Are you positive there are no extraneous
characters at the end of your date string such as carriage returns,
spaces, or tabs? I have the same format in the code I've written and
have never had a date parsing problem (yet).
Ryan Grange, IT Manager
Dolla
such
queries through quickly. The trick is to make sure you don't pick the
same random number twice. Perhaps an associative array using the number
as the key to you can check the existence of.
Ryan Grange, IT Manager
DollarDays International, LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
480-922-8155
u
to read up on XSLT creation though as what you're asking is definitely
doable. Possible problems I could see would be if you want the XSLT to
also generate navigation links for you automatically. Basic formatting
of the results shouldn't be a problem though.
Ryan Grange, I
than committing each update document
individually.
Ryan Grange, IT Manager
DollarDays International, LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
480-922-8155 x106
steve.lillywhite wrote:
Hi all,
This is a (possibly very naive) newbie question regarding Solr best practice...
I run a website that display
14 matches
Mail list logo
