Jan Hoydal / Otis,
First off, Thanks for mentioning us. We do use some utility functions from
SOLR but our index engine is built on top of Lucene only, there are no Solr
cores involved. We do have a JOIN operator that allows us to perform
relational searches while still acting like a search en
configuring
logging (and else), the application/war configured way. This lead me to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-549 SOLR-549 which is
cross-container but (alas) requires the code to change and introduces (yet
another) logging configuration convention.
Henri
Will Johnson-2 wro
Henri,
There are some bridges out there but none had a version number > 0.1. I
found the simplest way was to configure JUL using a custom config file and
then tell it to use my custom handler to forward all messages to log4j.
There are obvious performance implications but it is doable and fairly
Usually you do something like: (assuming this is in a rdbms)
SELECT sku.id as skuid, sku.name as skuname, item.name as itemname,
location.name as locationname
FROM sku, item, location
WHERE sku.item = item.id AND sku.location = location.id
The you can search on any part of the 'flat' record and
If you want any letter and any possible substring you might be better off
breaking every word into single letters with special tokens between words:
ie:
the quick brown fox
Becomes
t h e ZZ q u i c k ZZ b r o w n ZZ f o x
then you can do all the single letter searches and multi letter searches
Check out:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/solr/trunk/client/java/solrj/test/org/ap
ache/solr/client/solrj/SolrQueryTest.java?revision=555343&view=markup
or
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/solr/trunk/client/java/solrj/test/org/ap
ache/solr/client/solrj/SolrQueryTest.java?revision=555343&
key = sometimesUniqueField + "_" + otherTimesUniqueuField;
If one of them is always guaranteed to be unique you should be fine.
- will
-Original Message-
From: Dave C. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 2:07 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Multiple un
Check out:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-264
- will
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Ariel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 4:33 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Random return
Hi!
I need to query solr and then return a random document f
With the new/improved value source functions it should be pretty easy to
develop a new best practice. You should be able to pull in the lat/lon
values from valuesource fields and then do your greater circle calculation.
- will
-Original Message-
From: Lance Norskog [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECT
one other note. the errors pop up when running against the 1.3 trunk
but do not appear to happen when run against 1.2.
- will
On 9/19/07, Will Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> we were doing some performance testing for the updating aspects of solr and
>
TestJettyLargeVolume.java
Description: Binary data
we were doing some performance testing for the updating aspects of solr and ran into what seems to be a large problem. we're creating small documents with an id and one field of 1 term only submitting them in batches of 200 with commits every 50
take a look at the unit tests for examples of how to use the api.
also the client is a client API not a client for running queries etc.
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/solr/trunk/client/java/solrj/test/
org/apache/solr/client/solrj/
- will
On Aug 30, 2007, at 5:56 AM, Thierry Collogne
check out the patch(s) at:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-176
- will
On Aug 22, 2007, at 9:00 PM, Pieter Berkel wrote:
Matthew,
Maybe the SOLR Statistics page would suit your purpose?
(click on "statistics" from the main solr page or use the following
url)
http://localhost:898
Create a new field with the first character only, facet on that. Less
memory, less overall work.
- will
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Nagy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 11:38 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Facet on certain characters
Hello, I wa
I'm pretty sure that's a BOM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byte_Order_Mark
The web.xml in src/webapp also seems to have it there so I would assume that
any/all builds from the solr kit would have the same problem no matter where
you downloaded it from.
It looks like the BOM got checked in here
There are may ways to do this but I drop the following into the
solr.war/web-inf/classes/logging.properties files:
handlers = org.apache.juli.FileHandler, java.util.logging.ConsoleHandler
# Handler specific properties.
# Describes spec
>one thing to keep in mind: it's typically not a good idea to have the
>constraint set of a facet change just because some other constraint was
>added to the query -- individual constraints might disappear because
>they no longer apply, but it can be very disconcerting to a user to
>when options hc
is in the index prior to running the rest of the tests (namely nothing).
It's not at all required and probably not really recommended as a best
practice. :)
- will
-Original Message-----
From: Will Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 4:16 PM
To: solr-user@lu
If you create a SolrServer and start adding documents you are updating
the index with new documents. If you're id's happen to collide with
ones in the index then you will overwrite those documents but that's the
only way you could end up with less than existing docs + docs added.
- will
-Or
tried using that client, but I didn't get any good results while
searching
for worst with special characters. I have also searched for
documentation
for that client, but didn't find any.
Does anyone know where to find documentation concerning the java client?
On 14/06/07, Will Johns
The code in http://solrstuff.org/svn/solrj/ is very stable, works with
most all features for both searching and indexing and will be moving
into the main distribution soon as the standard java client library.
- will
-Original Message-
From: Martin Grotzke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>I can't think of any value add in having Solr keep track of the fact
that
>"ds" means "Download Speed" vs having an external data mapping keep
track
>of that information, since direct access to that info inside of Solr
>wouldn't typically make the performance of requests any faster or
>reduce the
ucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: field display values
Will Johnson wrote:
> Has anyone done anything interesting to preserve display values for
> field names. Ie my users would like to see
>
> Download Speed (MB/sec): 5
>
> As opposed to:
>
> ds:5
>
>
The g
Has anyone done anything interesting to preserve display values for
field names. Ie my users would like to see
Download Speed (MB/sec): 5
As opposed to:
ds:5
there are options for doing fancy encoding of field names but those seem
less that ideal. What I'd really like to do is at
I think I had the same problem (the same error at least) and submitted a
patch. The patch adds a new config option to use the nio locking
facilities instead of the default lucene locking. In the ~week since I
haven't seen the issue after applying the patch (ymmv)
https://issues.apache.org/jira/b
Original Message-
From: Martin Grotzke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:43 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Interesting Practical Solr Question
On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 10:07 -0400, Will Johnson wrote:
> Possible solutions inline:
>
> 1) I use face
> 3) Once the user saves the list, I want them to be able to do further
> searches by do a "negative union" with the set of ids they already
> saved. So for example, if they already saved 1000 ids into one of
> their
> lists, they would need to be able to get results from Solr that match
> their
Possible solutions inline:
1) I use facets and want to return the facets for "all documents" as the
starting point of the user interface. In other words, I want to /select
the facet counts for about 10 facets (like states for example) for all
documents without having to do a search. Is this possi
Adding entries to RequestHandlerBase.getStatistics() sounds like it
might be a reasonable compromise; backwards compatibility is kept in
place but everything from now on gets the added advantages of more
tracking. So far I've added (because I need)
avgTimePerRequest
avgRequestsPerSecond
I agree
I've needed similar logged information recently and I looked at the code
and had a few questions:
Why does SolrCore.setResponseHeaderValues(...) set the QTime (and other
response header options) instead of having it as a function of
RequestHandlerBase? If things were tracked in the RequestHandler
Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yonik
Seeley
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 9:07 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: fast update handlers
On 5/10/07, Will Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess I was more concerned with do
update handlers
On 5/10/07, Will Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm trying to setup a system to have very low index latency (1-2
> seconds) and one of the javadocs intrigued me:
>
> "DirectUpdateHandler2 implements an UpdateHandler where documents are
> added di
I'm trying to setup a system to have very low index latency (1-2
seconds) and one of the javadocs intrigued me:
"DirectUpdateHandler2 implements an UpdateHandler where documents are
added directly to the main Lucene index as opposed to adding to a
separate smaller index"
The plain DirectUpd
does solr support date range searching? i've tried all the examples on
the lucene site as well as using the solr response format and a few
others that seemed nifty but so far I always get query parsing errors.
i know i can easily convert the dates to ints and do ranges that way but
all the documen
Moved to:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-217
patch included.
- will
-Original Message-
From: Will Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:54 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: unused fields
Is there any way to make Solr not throw an
Is there any way to make Solr not throw an Exception when unknown field
names are submitted as a part of an otherwise valid document? Ie. I
have field named 'foo' in my document but it's not in my schema. For
various bookkeeping / tracking purposes I need to annotate the documents
with extra info
This is an interesting question. Having worked at 2 of the major
enterprise search software vendors for the last 6 years I can say that
most all other engines out there do in fact handle this by default
however they do it at the expense of having to define all the fields you
want facets on before
37 matches
Mail list logo
