Hi,
We extensively use date faceting in our application, but now since the index
has become very big we are dividing into shards. Since date/range faceting
don't work on Shards I was trying to apply the path to my Solr, currently
using 3.1 but planning for 3.4 upgrade.
Hi,
Note that if you want more control over the buckets, you may use facet.query
instead. Also, under development is SOLR-2366 which will eventually give a more
powerful gap specification to range facets.
--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
Solr Training -
Thanks Hoss.
Whatever you described does make sense, however we are migrating over from
FAST and the date range buckets work differently there. The expectations of
the business users are based on the existing system.
I need to reset their expectations ;-) ...
Thanks for the very detailed explana
: Can solr take the earliest date from the result set to be the value for
: "facet.date.start"? I dont want to have the value 1/1/1995 hardcoded in my
: application since a new data feed that gets into my index could be older
: than 1995 and i might keep missing them from the facet.
no, you have
Hi Everyone,
I am trying to configure date faceting on Solr 3.1. I browsed through the
wiki and understood how to enable and configure it.
To explain this better, lets take an example -
my index has docs with dates ranging from 01/01/1995 until NOW (ie., today)
as of now. To configure date
I would use facet queries:
facet.query=date:[NOW-1DAY TO NOW]
facet.query=date:[NOW-3DAY TO NOW]
facet.query=date:[NOW-7DAY TO NOW]
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Date-faceting-per-last-hour-three-days-and-last-week-tp3242364p3242574.html
Sent from the Solr
Hi,
I'm trying date faceting per last 24 hours, three days and last week, but I
don't know how to do it.
I have a DateField and I want to set different ranges, it is posible?
I understand the example from solr
wiki<http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SimpleFacetParameters#
I am trying to facet based on date field and apply user timezone offset so
that the faceted results are in user timezone. My faceted result is given
below,
0
6
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 10/22/2010 3:01 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Chris Hostetter
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> the default query parser
>>> doesn't support range queries with mixed upper/lower bound inclusion.
>>
>> This has just been
On 10/22/2010 3:01 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Chris Hostetter
wrote:
the default query parser
doesn't support range queries with mixed upper/lower bound inclusion.
This has just been added to trunk.
Things like [0 TO 100} now work.
Awesome! Is it easily port
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Chris Hostetter
wrote:
> the default query parser
> doesn't support range queries with mixed upper/lower bound inclusion.
This has just been added to trunk.
Things like [0 TO 100} now work.
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
hat i know
of) solve it by adding that millisecond when indexing -- even before solr
had date faceting it was a common trick because the default query parser
doesn't support range queries with mixed upper/lower bound inclusion.
-Hoss
--
http://lucenerevolution.org/ ... October 7-8, Bosto
Crowded'
Laugh at http://www.yert.com/film.php
--- On Thu, 9/9/10, Liam O'Boyle wrote:
> From: Liam O'Boyle
> Subject: Re: Date faceting +1MONTH problem
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Date: Thursday, September 9, 2010, 4:20 PM
> Hi Chris,
>
> Yes
Just attended a talk at JavaZone (www.javazone.no) by Stephen Colebourne about
JSR-310 which will make these kind of operations easier in future JDK, and how
Joda-Time goes a great way of enabling it today. I'm not saying it would fix
your GAP issue, as it's all about what definition of "month"
Hi Chris,
Yes, I saw the facet.range.include feature and briefly tried to implement it
before realising that it was Solr 3.1 only :) I agree that it seems like
the best solution to problem.
Reindexing with a +1MILLI hack had occurred to me and I guess that's what
I'll do in the meantime; it just
: I'm trying to break down the data over a year into facets by month; to avoid
: overlap, I'm using -1MILLI on the start and end dates and using a gap of
: +1MONTH.
:
: However, it seems like February completely breaks my monthly cycles, leading
Yep.
Everything you posted makes sense to me in ho
Evening,
I'm trying to break down the data over a year into facets by month; to avoid
overlap, I'm using -1MILLI on the start and end dates and using a gap of
+1MONTH.
However, it seems like February completely breaks my monthly cycles, leading
to incorrect counts further down the line; facets th
Yes, I forgot that strings support alphanumeric ranges.
However, they will potentially be very memory intensive since you dont get the
trie-optimization and since strings take up more space than ints. Only way is
to try it out.
--
Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
Cominvent AS - www.cominve
adding
facet.query=timestamp:[20100601+TO+201006312359]&facet.query=timestamp:[20100701+TO+201007312359]...
in query should give the desired response without changing the schema or
re-indexing.
If you want to change the schema on the live index, make sure you do a
compatible change, as Solr does not do any type checking or schema change
validation.
I would ADD a field with another name for the tint field.
Unfortunately you have to re-index to have an index built on this field.
May I su
Thanks Mark. Yeah, storing it as 'tint' would be quite efficient.As i cannot
re-index the massive data, please let me know if the changes i make in
schema reflect to the already indexed data? I am not sure how type checking
happens in solr.
You can then do a facet query, specifying your desired r
Aug 2010, at 9:28 am, Karthik K wrote:
I have a field storing timestamp as text (MMDDHHMM). Can i get the
results as i get with date faceting? (July(30),August(54) etc)
As per my knowledge Solr currently doesn't support range faceting,
even if
it does in the future , text will not be recognize
I have a field storing timestamp as text (MMDDHHMM). Can i get the
results as i get with date faceting? (July(30),August(54) etc)
As per my knowledge Solr currently doesn't support range faceting, even if
it does in the future , text will not be recognized as integer/long.
Tried
Thanks Koji,
It works :-)
Have a nice day.
regards
ericz
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Koji Sekiguchi wrote:
> (10/08/04 19:42), Eric Grobler wrote:
>
>> Hi Solr community,
>>
>> How do I facet on timestamp for example?
>>
>> I tried something like this - but I get no result.
>>
>> facet=t
(10/08/04 19:42), Eric Grobler wrote:
Hi Solr community,
How do I facet on timestamp for example?
I tried something like this - but I get no result.
facet=true
facet.date=timestamp
f.facet.timestamp.date.start=2010-01-01T00:00:00Z
f.facet.timestamp.date.end=2010-12-31T00:00:00Z
f.facet.timesta
Hi Solr community,
How do I facet on timestamp for example?
I tried something like this - but I get no result.
facet=true
facet.date=timestamp
f.facet.timestamp.date.start=2010-01-01T00:00:00Z
f.facet.timestamp.date.end=2010-12-31T00:00:00Z
f.facet.timestamp.date.gap=+1HOUR
f.facet.timestamp.dat
From: Chris Hostetter-3 [via Lucene]
[mailto:ml-node+825052-1711725506-201...@n3.nabble.com]
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 9:04 PM
To: Ge, Yao (Y.)
Subject: Re: Date faceting and memory leaks
: Cache settings:
:
that's a monster filterCache ...i can easly imagine it causing an OOM if
on you can help with your
insight with just the little fraction of information provided. Thanks again!
-Yao
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Date-faceting-and-memory-leaks-tp824372p825059.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
: Cache settings:
:
that's a monster filterCache ...i can easly imagine it causing an OOM if
your heap is only 5G.
: The date rounding suggest is a very good one, I will need to rerun the test
: and report back on the cache setting. I remember my filterCache hit ratio is
: around 0.7. I did u
d test request URL.
Thanks again and I will report back on the re-run with date rounding.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Date-faceting-and-memory-leaks-tp824372p825038.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
: Subject: Date faceting and memory leaks
First off, just to be clear, you don't seem to be useing the "date
faceting" feature, you are using the "Facet Query" feature, your queries
just so happen to be on a date field.
Second: to help people help you, you need t
field facets with no problem (JVM heap size would stabilize at certain level
over time).
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Date-faceting-and-memory-leaks-tp824372p824577.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
2010 2:44 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Date faceting and memory leaks
>
> What garbage collection settings are you running at the command line
> when starting Solr?
> On May 17, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Yao wrote:
>
>>
>> I have been running load testing using JM
44 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Date faceting and memory leaks
What garbage collection settings are you running at the command line
when starting Solr?
On May 17, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Yao wrote:
>
> I have been running load testing using JMeter on a Solr 1.4 index with
~4
>
ed for filterCache setting but does not have any effects as the
> date field cache seems be managed by Lucene FieldCahce.
>
> Please help as I can be struggling with this for days. Thanks in advance.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Date-
eld with a precisionStep of 6.
I have played for filterCache setting but does not have any effects as the
date field cache seems be managed by Lucene FieldCahce.
Please help as I can be struggling with this for days. Thanks in advance.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabbl
: What are wild-card range searches?
i'm pretty sure we was just refering to open ended range searchers, like
the example he asked about...
: > What does this mean?
: >
: > {* TO *}
:
: Same thing as [* TO *] - not worth trying to make it different IMO.
...right, that's something the Sol
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Lance Norskog wrote:
> Thanks! I had to find this in the Lucene query parser syntax- it is
> not mentioned anywhere in the Solr wiki. You are right [a TO z} and {a
> TO z] are obvious improvements and solve the bucket-search problem the
> right way. But this collid
Thanks! I had to find this in the Lucene query parser syntax- it is
not mentioned anywhere in the Solr wiki. You are right [a TO z} and {a
TO z] are obvious improvements and solve the bucket-search problem the
right way. But this collides with wild-card range searches.
What does this mean?
: datefield:[X TO* Y] for X to Y-0....1
:
: This would be backwards-compatible. {} are used for other things and lexing
You lost me there ... {} aren't used for "other things" in the query
parser -- they're used for range queries that are exclusive of their end
points. datefield:{X TO
datefield:[X TO* Y] for X to Y-0....1
This would be backwards-compatible. {} are used for other things and lexing
is a dying art. Using a * causes mistakes to trigger wildcard syntaxes,
which will fail loudly.
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
> : I ran into that p
: I ran into that problem as well but the solution was provided to me by
: this very list :) See
: http://www.nabble.com/Range-queries-td24057317.html It's not the
: cleanest solution, but as long as you know what you're doing it's not
: that bad.
Hmmm... yeah, that's a total hack. one of these
Chris Hostetter wrote:
: When I added numerical faceting to my checkout of solr (solr-1240) I basically
: copied date faceting and modified it to work with numbers instead of dates.
: With numbers I got a lot of doulbe-counted values as well. So to fix my
: problem I added an extra parameter to
: When I added numerical faceting to my checkout of solr (solr-1240) I basically
: copied date faceting and modified it to work with numbers instead of dates.
: With numbers I got a lot of doulbe-counted values as well. So to fix my
: problem I added an extra parameter to number faceting where
: Is this a known behavior people are happy with, or should I file an issue
: asking for ranges in date-facets to be constructed to subtract one second
: from the end of each range (so that the effective range queries for my case
It's a known anoyance, but not something that seems to anoy people e
Hi Stephen,
When I added numerical faceting to my checkout of solr (solr-1240) I
basically copied date faceting and modified it to work with numbers
instead of dates. With numbers I got a lot of doulbe-counted values as
well. So to fix my problem I added an extra parameter to number faceting
I don't think this behavior needs to be fixed. It is justified for the data
you have indexed.
"date minus 1 second" should definitely work for you.
Cheers
Avlesh
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Stephen Duncan Jr <
stephen.dun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If we do date facet
If we do date faceting and start at 2009-01-01T00:00:00Z, end at
2009-01-03T00:00:00Z, with a gap of +1DAY, then documents that occur at
exactly 2009-01-02T00:00:00Z will be included in both the returned counts
(2009-01-01T00:00:00Z and 2009-01-02T00:00:00Z). At the moment, this is
quite bad for
<
> > shalinman...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry, I'm late in this thread.
> > >
> > > Did you try using Trie fields (new in 1.4)? The regular date faceting
> > won't
> > > work out-of-the-box for trie fields I think. But you could use
>
M, Shalin Shekhar Mangar <
> shalinman...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I'm late in this thread.
> >
> > Did you try using Trie fields (new in 1.4)? The regular date faceting
> won't
> > work out-of-the-box for trie fields I think. But you could use
> fa
Aha!
Hmm , googling wont help me I see. any hints of usages ?
/M
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar <
shalinman...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, I'm late in this thread.
>
> Did you try using Trie fields (new in 1.4)? The regular date faceting won't
Sorry, I'm late in this thread.
Did you try using Trie fields (new in 1.4)? The regular date faceting won't
work out-of-the-box for trie fields I think. But you could use facet.query
to achieve the same effect. On my simple benchmarks I've found trie fields
to give a huge impro
pr 25, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Otis Gospodnetic <
> >> otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I should emphasize that the PR trick I mentioned is something you'd do
> at
> >>> the Lucene level, outside Solr, and then you'd
'd just slip the modified index
>>> back into Solr.
>>> Of, if you like the bleeding edge, perhaps you can make use of Ning Li's
>>> Solr index merging functionality (patch in JIRA).
>>>
>>>
>>> Otis --
>>> Sematext -- http://s
Of, if you like the bleeding edge, perhaps you can make use of Ning Li's
>> Solr index merging functionality (patch in JIRA).
>>
>>
>> Otis --
>> Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
>>
>>
>>
>> - Original Message
into Solr.
>> Of, if you like the bleeding edge, perhaps you can make use of Ning Li's
>> Solr index merging functionality (patch in JIRA).
>>
>>
>> Otis --
>> Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
>>
>>
>>
>> -
;
> Otis --
> Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
>
>
>
> - Original Message
> > From: Otis Gospodnetic
> > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 9:41:45 AM
> > Subject: Re: Date faceting - howto impro
(patch in JIRA).
Otis --
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
- Original Message
> From: Otis Gospodnetic
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 9:41:45 AM
> Subject: Re: Date faceting - howto improve performance
>
>
>
Otis --
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
- Original Message
> From: Marcus Herou
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 6:54:02 AM
> Subject: Date faceting - howto improve performance
>
> Hi.
>
> One of our faceting
__
From: Marcus Herou [marcus.he...@tailsweep.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 6:54 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Date faceting - howto improve performance
Hi.
One of our faceting use-cases:
We are creating trend graphs of how many blog posts that contains a certain
term and groups
Hi.
One of our faceting use-cases:
We are creating trend graphs of how many blog posts that contains a certain
term and groups it by day/week/year etc. with the nice DateMathParser
functions.
The performance degrades really fast and consumes a lot of memory which
forces OOM from time to time
We t
It *looks* as though Solr supports returning the results of arbitrary
calculations:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrQuerySyntax
However, I am so far unable to get any example working except in the
context of a dismax bf. It seems like one ought to be able to write a
query to return the doc match
Hi,
I'm trying to write some code to build a facet list for a date field,
but I don't know what the first and last available dates are. I would
adjust the gap param accordingly. If there is a 10yr stretch between
min(date) and max(date) I'd want to facet by year. If it is a 1 month
gap, I'd wan
: I'm having an issue w/ the date faceter, running solr 1.2.0 on Tomcat
Welcom to the list Delsey,
Date Faceting was only recently added to the Solr trunk ... there is a
wiki convention of noting when docs refer to "bleeding edge" stuff not in
the latest release by noting h
Hi,
This is my first post to the list, having done my FAQ/wiki/archive due
diligence to no avail.
I'm having an issue w/ the date faceter, running solr 1.2.0 on Tomcat populated with the example
data. When I make a date facet request (example copied verbatim from the SimpleFacetParameter
wik
65 matches
Mail list logo
