Maybe solr isn't using enough of your available memory (a rough check is
produced by 'solr status'). Do you realize you can start solr with a
'-m xx' parameter? (for me, xx = 1g)
Terry
On 1/13/20 3:12 PM, rhys J wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 3:11 PM Gael Jourdan-Weil <
gael.jourdan-w...@kel
For what it's worth - after not using it for some time, I just started
up my solr system (6.6.0) and made a mistake in the command line. I
mistakenly used 'bin/solr start -c -m 1gb' and got precisely the same
error message as Bernard did (other than the '.." part).
When I changed it to the corre
Using 6.6.0, I am able to index EML files just fine. The trick is, when
indexing files containing .eml, add "-filetypes eml" to the commandline
(note the plural filetypes).
Terry Steichen
On 1/13/19 10:18 PM, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am using Solr 7
I think a better approach to tunneling would be:
ssh -p -L :localhost:8983 use...@myremoteserver.example.com
This requires you to set up a different port () rather than use the
standard 22 port (on your router and on your sshd config). I've been
running something like this for about
Thanks, Dominique. This appears to explain a LOT of past confusion.
Terry
On 12/31/18 5:26 AM, Dominique Bejean wrote:
> So in Solr standalone mode, only authentication is fully functional, not
> authorization !
ey're trying to
retrieve. And, depending on your system implementation, that
information may be only available via a Solr search result (the access
to which can be restricted).
Terry Steichen
On 12/8/18 12:06 AM, Noble Paul wrote:
> You can't restrict access to static files.
>
&g
I think there's been some confusion on which standalone versions support
authentication. I'm using 6.6 in cloud mode (purely so the
authentication will work). Some of the documentation seems to say that
only cloud implementations support it, but others (like the experts on
this forum) say that la
What Solr version are you using?
On 12/4/18 2:47 PM, yydpkm wrote:
> Thank you for your replay. I use your format and failed. User2 can still
> visit collection "name"
> Could that because I am using standalone Solr not Solrcloud?
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Us
In setting his permission, Antony said he set "path": "/admin/file". I
use "path":"/*" - that may be too restrictive for you, but it works fine
(for me).
On 12/4/18 9:55 AM, yydpkm wrote:
> Hi Antony,
>
> Have you solved this? I am facing the same thing. Other users can still do
> /select after
+1
My experience is that you can't easily tell ahead of time whether your PDF is
searchable or not. If it is, you may not even retrieve it because there's no
text to index. Also, if you blindly OCR a file that has already been OCR'd, it
can create a mess. Most higher end PDF editors have a bat
Erick,
I don't get any such message when I start solr - could you share what
that curl command should be?
You suggest modifying solrconfig.xml - could you be more explicit on
what changes to make?
Terry
On 10/11/2018 11:52 AM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> bq: Also why solr updates and persists the
Don't know if this directly affects what you're trying to do. But I
have an 8GB server and when I run "solr status" I can see what % of the
automatic memory allocation is being used. As it turned out, solr would
occasionally exceed that (and crashed).
I then began starting solr with the additio
Bineesh,
I don't use Nutch, so don't know if this is relevant, but I've had
similar-sounding failures in doing and restoring backups. The solution
for me was to deactivate authentication while the backup was being done,
and then activate it again afterwards. Then everything was restored
correctl
tions in 4) first as they roughly bisect the problem. But other
> things are important too.
>
> I hope this helps,
> Alex.
>
>
> On 26 September 2018 at 16:39, Terry Steichen wrote:
>> Shawn,
>>
>> To the best of my knowledge, I'm not using Solr
ot show up in any of solr's log files?
Hard to believe (but what is, is, I guess).
Terry
On 09/26/2018 03:49 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 9/26/2018 1:23 PM, Terry Steichen wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure this was covered earlier. But I can't find references
>> to it. The
ch ones or what might have caused the error.) As I recall, Solr's
post tool doesn't give any errors when indexing. I (vaguely) recall
that there's a way (through the logs?) to overcome this and show the
errors. Or maybe it's that you have to do the indexing outside of Solr?
Terry Steichen
uot;:0
,"docs":[ { "id":"test2", "meta_creation_date":["2018-04-30T00:00:00Z"], "
meta_creation_date_range":"2018-04-30T00:00:00Z", "_version_":
1603034044781559808}, { "id":"test",
Walter,
Well said. (And I love the hamburger conversion analogy - very apt.)
The only thing I will add is that when you have a collection of similar
rich text documents, you might be able to construct queries to respect
internal structures within the documents. If all/most of your documents
hav
"When authentication is enabled ALL requests must carry valid
credentials." I believe this behavior depends on the value you set for
the *blockUnknown* authentication parameter.
On 06/15/2018 06:25 AM, Jan Høydahl wrote:
> When authentication is enabled ALL requests must carry valid credentials.
ad, ...) the Solr docs they seem
to be making certain (very basic) assumptions that I'm unclear about, so
your help in the preceding would be most appreciated.
Thanks.
Terry
On 06/14/2018 01:51 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 6/11/2018 2:02 PM, Terry Steichen wrote:
>> I am usi
I am using Solr (6.6.0) in the automatic mode (where it discovers
fields). It's working fine with one exception. The problem is that
Solr maps the discovered "meta_creation_date" is assigned the type
TrieDateField.
Unfortunately, that type is limited in a number of ways (like sorting,
abbreviat
To me, one of the more frustrating things I've encountered in Solr is
working with date fields. Supposedly, according to the documentation,
this is straightforward. But in my experience, it is anything but
that. In particular, I've found that the abbreviated forms of date
queries, don't work as
aining to the
job of actually locating and retrieving hitlist documents.
My way "seems" to work, and it is quite simple and compact. I just
threw it out seeking a sanity check from others.
Terry
On 05/14/2018 11:32 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 5/14/2018 6:46 AM, Terry Steichen wro
In order to allow users to retrieve the documents that match a query, I
make use of the embedded Jetty container to provide file server
functionality. To make this happen, I provide a symbolic link between
the actual document archive, and the Jetty file server. This seems
somewhat of a kludge, an
Thanks, Tim. A couple of quick comments and a couple of questions:
1) the toughest pdfs to identify are those that are partly
searchable (text) and partly not (image-based text). However, I've
found that such documents tend to exist in clusters.
2) email documents (.eml) are no
at the extraction process can
> result in garbage, lots of garbage. OCR is particularly prone to
> nonsense. PDFs can be tricky,
> there's this spacing parameter that, depending on it's setting can
> render e r i c k as 5 separate
> letters or
wiki.apache.org/tika/TikaEval
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Charlie Hull [mailto:char...@flax.co.uk]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 4:17 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Specialized Solr Application
>
> On 16/04/2018 19:48, Terry Steichen wrote:
>&g
preciated to
dump them on this (excellent) Solr list. So, if you encounter problems
peculiar to this kind of setup, we can perhaps help handle them off-list
(although if they have more general Solr application, we should, of
course, post them to the list).
Terry Steichen
nd/or early release might be reflected back in the
original change (11622).
Anyway, I'm a happy camper now. Thanks to all.
On 04/05/2018 11:37 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 4/5/2018 9:05 AM, Terry Steichen wrote:
>> I'm a bit confused because of the issue I was concerned
I'm a bit confused because of the issue I was concerned about earlier:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11622
It was supposed to be fixed and included in (the then-future) 7.3, but I
don't see it there in the listed 7.3.0 changes/bug-fixes.
Am I missing something?
On 04/05/2018 10:05 A
On 03/29/2018 11:07 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 3/29/2018 8:28 PM, Terry Steichen wrote:
>> When I set up the initial authentications and authorizations (I'm using
>> 6.6.0 and running in cloud mode.), I call "bin/solr auth enable
>> -credentials xxx:yyy"
When I set up the initial authentications and authorizations (I'm using
6.6.0 and running in cloud mode.), I call "bin/solr auth enable
-credentials xxx:yyy". I then use a series of additional API calls ( to
create additional users and permissions). This creates my desired
security environment (a
First question: When indexing content in a directory, Solr's normal
behavior is to recursively index all the files found in that directory
and its subdirectories. However, turns out that when the files are of
the form *.eml (email), solr won't do that. I can use a wildcard to get
it to index the
AM, Terry Steichen wrote:
>> What also puzzles me is that I can't find any "security.json" file.
>> Clearly, solr is persistently keeping track of the
>> authentication/authorization information, but I don't see where. I
>> suppose it might be kept in zoo
7;ve never worked with 6.6, but I've not noticed any big
> differences between the security for our 6.3 deployments and the 7.X ones.
>
> Best,
> Chris
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:47 PM Terry Steichen wrote:
>
>> I switched solr from standalone to cloud and create
x27;
{
"responseHeader":{
"status":0,
"QTime":2},
"errorMessages":[{
"set-permission":{
"name":"collection-admin-edit",
"role":"admin"},
"errorMessages":["
I'm resending the information below because the original message got the
security.json stuff garbled.
I'm using 6.6.0 with security.json active, having the content shown
below. I am running standalone mode, have two
I'm using 6.6.0 with security.json active, having the content shown
below. I am running standalone mode, have two solr cores defined:
email1, and email2. Since the 'blockUnknown' is set to false, everyone
should have access to any unprotected resource. As you can see, I have
three users defined:
I'm trying to set up basic authentication/authorization with solr 6.6.0.
The documentation says to create a security.json file and describes the
content as:
{
"authentication":{
"class":"solr.BasicAuthPlugin",
"credentials":{"solr":"IV0EHq1OnNrj6gvRCwvFwTrZ1+z1oBbnQdiVC3otuq0=
Ndd7LKvVBAaZ
directory R-O?
Terry
On 03/06/2018 04:20 PM, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> Terry,
>
> On 3/6/18 4:08 PM, Terry Steichen wrote:
> > Is it possible to run solr in a read-only directory?
>
> > I'm running it just fine on a ubuntu server which is accessible
> >
Is it possible to run solr in a read-only directory?
I'm running it just fine on a ubuntu server which is accessible only
through SSH tunneling. At the platform level, this is fine: only
authorized users can access it (via a browser on their machine accessing
a forwarded port).
The problem is t
for this
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11622 which is fixed for future
> release.
>
> Before running into this issue we were running 6.4.2 which did not have
> this bug.
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 9:59 AM, Terry Steichen wrote:
>
>> I am using Solr 7.2.1
I am using Solr 7.2.1 and trying to index (among other documents)
individual emails and collected email threats. Ideally, the indexing
would parse the email messages into their constituent fields. But, for
my purposes, an acceptable alternative is to merely index the messages a
unstructured text.
43 matches
Mail list logo
