BlockJoinQuery parser question

Hi, Can an index contain both Standalone documents and nested documents ? I remember being told before that this may not work, but asking again for confirmation here. What I have is a bunch of standalone document followed by nested documents in the index. The BlockJoin then works fine and am a

Re: BlockJoinQuery parser and ArrayIndexOutOfBoundException

16 at 7:18 AM, Sathyakumar Seshachalam < >sathyakumar_seshacha...@trimble.com> wrote: > >> In my case, yes there are standalone docs (without any parents) and then >> there is blocks with parents and its children in the same index. >> > >As far as I know you can

Re: BlockJoinQuery parser and ArrayIndexOutOfBoundException

l there is no >deleted docs. >Can it happen that standalone docs and parent blocks are mixed in the >index? > >On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Sathyakumar Seshachalam < >sathyakumar_seshacha...@trimble.com> wrote: > >> Am running in to this issue : >> https://i

BlockJoinQuery parser and ArrayIndexOutOfBoundException

Am running in to this issue : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7606. But am not following all of the description there in that ticket. But what I am not able to understand is when does a parent/child orthogonality is broken. And what does a child document without a parent mean ? I hav

Re: Nested documents and many-many relation

you >>must >> do an add of the entire block again with both the parent and all >>children. >> This is because the efficiency of Block Join comes from the documents >>being >> adjacent in Lucene and segments are immutable in Lucene, so the entire >> bloc

Nested documents and many-many relation

Hi, Am trying to investigate the possibility of using Block Join query parser in a many-to-many relation scenario. Observation is that when a document is added as a child to more than one parent document (I use Solrj to do this), I seem to get two copies of the child document. Can this be avoid

Re: Solr Integration tests

ks Ok, But getSolrHome in AbstractSolrTestCase is never called 3. The code imposes a class hierarchy on the test classes 4. Not enough documentation / samples etc., On 10/12/15, 10:51 AM, "Sathyakumar Seshachalam" wrote: >Hello Andrea, > >Thanks for the link. Am running 4.10.

Re: Sold Integration tests

help. > >Andrea > >[1] >http://andreagazzarini.blogspot.it/2015/10/how-to-do-integration-tests-wit >h-solr.html > >2015-12-09 11:32 GMT+01:00 Sathyakumar Seshachalam < >sathyakumar_seshacha...@trimble.com>: > >> Are there any documentations around Solr test fr

Sold Integration tests

Are there any documentations around Solr test framework. (http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.solr/solr-test-framework) I am looking to do integration tests to just check if I am able to add document and search it via JUnitTests. There does seem to be a test-framework from solr, but th

Re: Explicit commit with openSearcher=false

I intend to use SolrJ. I only saw the below overloaded commit method in documentation (http://lucene.apache.org/solr/4_10_3/solr-solrj/index.html) of class ³org.apache.solr.client.solrj.SolrServer" public UpdateResponse commit(boolean waitFlush, boolean waitSearcher, boolean softCommit). And I a

Re: Explicit commit with openSearcher=false

And I am using version 4.10.3 On 11/11/15, 4:04 PM, "Sathyakumar Seshachalam" wrote: >Hi, > >I have a Search system based on Solr that relies on autoCommit >configuration (with openSearcher=false). I now have a use-case that >requires me to disable autoCommit and issue

Explicit commit with openSearcher=false

Hi, I have a Search system based on Solr that relies on autoCommit configuration (with openSearcher=false). I now have a use-case that requires me to disable autoCommit and issue explicit commit commands, But as I understand an explicit commit command "always" opens a searcher. Is this correct