Perfect Joel,
keep me updated !
Cheers
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:26 PM, Joel Bernstein wrote:
> Alessandro, I'll be doing some testing with the re-ranker as part of
> SOLR-9403 for Solr 6.3. I'll see if I can better understand the issue
> you're bringing up during the testing. I'll report back
Alessandro, I'll be doing some testing with the re-ranker as part of
SOLR-9403 for Solr 6.3. I'll see if I can better understand the issue
you're bringing up during the testing. I'll report back to this thread
after I've done some testing.
Joel Bernstein
http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
On Fri, Sep
In addition to that, I think the only way to solve this is to rely on the
aggregator node to actually re-rank after having aggregated.
Cheer
On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Alessandro Benedetti wrote:
> Let me explain further,
> let's assume a simple case when we have 2 shards.
> ReRankDocs =1
Let me explain further,
let's assume a simple case when we have 2 shards.
ReRankDocs =10 , rows=10 .
Correct me if I am wrong Joel,
What we would like :
1 page : top 10 re-scored
2 page: remaining 10 re-scored
>From page 3 the original scored docs.
This is what is happening in a single sol instanc
I'm not understanding where the inconsistency comes into play.
The re-ranking occurs on the shards. The aggregator node will be sent some
docs that have been re-scored and others that are not. But the sorting
should be the same as someone pages through the result set.
Joel Bernstein
http://joel
Hi guys,
was just experimenting some reranker with really low number of rerank docs
( 10= pageSize) .
Let's focus on the distributed enviroment and the manual sharding approach.
Currently what happens is that the reranking task is delivered by the
shards, they rescore the docs and then send them
