Hi,
I'm trying to use Solr query function as a boost for term matches in the
title field. Here's my boost function
bf=if(exists(query({!v='title:Import data'})),10,0)
This throws the following error --> can not use FieldCache on multivalued
field: data
The function s
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 7:14 PM, Erick Erickson
wrote:
>
> Faceting works on multivalued fields, perhaps you can do something with
> that?
>
> The main difference I see in this case between facets and groups is that
groups are sorted by score, so most relevant group comes first.
Which is very use
t;> > Best regards,
>> > Vincenzo
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Amrit Sarkar
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Vincenzo,
>> >>
>> >> As I read the source code; Schem
; >> * for a field that may be used to get a FieldCacheSource, throwing
> >> * an appropriate exception (including the field name) if it is not.
> >> * FieldType subclasses can choose to call this method in their
> >> * getValueSource implementation
> >>
e subclasses can choose to call this method in their
>> * getValueSource implementation
>> * @see FieldType#getValueSource
>> */
>> public void checkFieldCacheSource() throws SolrException {
>> if ( multiValued() ) {
>> throw new SolrException(SolrExce
> * @see FieldType#getValueSource
> */
> public void checkFieldCacheSource() throws SolrException {
> if ( multiValued() ) {
> throw new SolrException(SolrException.ErrorCode.BAD_REQUEST,
> "can not use FieldCache on multivalued field:
t use FieldCache on multivalued field: "
+ getName());
}
if (! hasDocValues() ) {
if ( ! ( indexed() && null != this.type.getUninversionType(this) ) ) {
throw new SolrException(SolrException.ErrorCode.BAD_REQUEST,
"ca
Hi,
while trying to run a group query on a multivalue field I received this
error:
can not use FieldCache on multivalued field:
true
400
4
org.apache.solr.common.SolrException
org.apache.solr.common.SolrException
can not use FieldCache on multivalued field
s for sure assuming you are
using the latest Solr release (6.5.x). You said "Solr version 6.1.0" which
doesn't have this field type though.
~ David
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 8:26 AM freddy79
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> when doing a query with spatial search i get the error: can not
It does work with "solr.LatLonPointSpatialField" instead of
"solr.LatLonType".
But why not with "solr.LatLonType"?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Spatial-Search-can-not-use-FieldCache-on-a-field-which-is-neither-index
Hi,
when doing a query with spatial search i get the error: can not use
FieldCache on a field which is neither indexed nor has doc values:
latitudeLongitude_0_coordinate
*SOLR Version:* 6.1.0
*schema.xml:*
*Query:*
http://localhost:8983/solr/career_educationVacancyLocation/select?q=*:*&am
t; > > In the case of the Lucene field cache, it's possible "clean" it in some
> > > > way?
> > > >
> > > > Even it would be possible, the first sorting query or so loads it back.
> > >
> > > > Some cache is eating my memo
eld cache, it's possible "clean" it in some
> > > way?
> > >
> > > Even it would be possible, the first sorting query or so loads it back.
> >
> > > Some cache is eating my memory heap.
> > >
> > Probably you need to dedicate mast
cant' fully disable it setting size to 0.
>>
>>
>>> My insert rate is so high
>>> (5000 docs/s) that the cache it's quite useless.
>>>
>>> In the case of the Lucene field cache, it's possible "clean" it in some
>>>
it in some
> > way?
> >
> > Even it would be possible, the first sorting query or so loads it back.
>
> > Some cache is eating my memory heap.
> >
> Probably you need to dedicate master which won't load FieldCache.
>
>
> >
> >
> >
or so loads it back.
> Some cache is eating my memory heap.
>
Probably you need to dedicate master which won't load FieldCache.
>
>
>
> -
> Best regards
>
> /Yago
> --
> View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.
> nabble.com/Question-ab
Best regards
/Yago
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Question-about-Lucene-FieldCache-tp4313062p4313069.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hello, Yago.
"size": "1", "showItems": "-1", "initialSize": "10", "name":
"fieldValueCache"
These are Solr's UnInvertedFields, not Lucene's FieldCache.
That 1 is for all fields of the collection s
Hi,
After some reading into the documentation, supposedly the Lucene FieldCache
is the only one that it's not possible to disable.
Fetching the config for a collection through the REST API I found an entry
like this:
"query": {
"useFilterForSortedQuery": true,
&
e.
> >>
> >> But memory is an ongoing struggle I'm afraid.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Erick
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Phillip Peleshok
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hey everyone,
> >> >
> >> > I'
Thank you for the info on this. Yeah, I should've raised this in the dev
lists; sorry about that. Funny you mention that since I was trending in
that direction as well. Then saw the off-heap stuff and thought it might
have had an easy way out. I'd like to focus on the re-use scheme to be
honest
time now and running into GC issues as most
>> > others have. Now I've exhausted all the traditional GC settings
>> > recommended by various individuals (ie Shawn Heisey, etc) but neither
>> > proved sufficient. The one solution that I've seen that proved useful i
On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 18:14 -0700, Erick Erickson wrote:
> But memory is an ongoing struggle I'm afraid.
With fear of going too far into devel-territory...
There are several places in Solr where memory usage if far from optimal
with high-cardinality data and where improvements can be made withou
The one solution that I've seen that proved useful is
> > Heliosearch and the off-heap implementation.
> >
> > My question is this, why wasn't the off-heap FieldCache implementation (
> > http://yonik.com/hs-solr-off-heap-fieldcache-performance/) ever rolled
> into
&
all the traditional GC settings
> recommended by various individuals (ie Shawn Heisey, etc) but neither
> proved sufficient. The one solution that I've seen that proved useful is
> Heliosearch and the off-heap implementation.
>
> My question is this, why wasn't the off-he
roved useful is
Heliosearch and the off-heap implementation.
My question is this, why wasn't the off-heap FieldCache implementation (
http://yonik.com/hs-solr-off-heap-fieldcache-performance/) ever rolled into
Solr when the other HelioSearch improvement were merged? Was there a
fundamental desi
Hi,
I need to evaluate different boost solutions performance and I can't find
any relevant documentation about it. Are fieldCache and/or DocValues used
by Function Queries?
-9bc5-33a38a7123456"),2,1))
however I am worried about performance.
My questions are:
- In the bf parameter are FieldCache and DocValues used?
- Is termfreq calculated all the time or we simply read the existing value?
- increasing the number of clauses (for instance adding more nested if)
what k
h works as well.
Older versions of Solr would happily populate a FieldCache entry with
a multi-valued field by overwriting old values with new values while
uninverting. Thus the FieldCache entry (used for sorting, faceting,
grouping, function queries, etc) would contain just the last/highest
value f
Message-
From: Toke Eskildsen [mailto:t...@statsbiblioteket.dk]
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 12:31 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: FieldCache
On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 00:18 +, Lewin Joy (TMS) wrote:
> I am working on Solr 4.10.3 on Cloudera CDH 5.4.4 and am trying
On Thu, 2016-01-14 at 00:18 +, Lewin Joy (TMS) wrote:
> I am working on Solr 4.10.3 on Cloudera CDH 5.4.4 and am trying to
> group results on a multivalued field, let's say "interests".
...
> But after I just re-indexed the data, it started working.
Grouping is not supposed to be supported for
Hi,
I have been facing a weird issue in solr.
I am working on Solr 4.10.3 on Cloudera CDH 5.4.4 and am trying to group
results on a multivalued field, let's say "interests".
This is giving me an error message below:
"error": {
"msg": "can
*updated subject line
Hi,
I have been facing a weird issue in solr.
I am working on Solr 4.10.3 on Cloudera CDH 5.4.4 and am trying to group
results on a multivalued field, let's say "interests".
This is giving me an error message below:
"error": {
"ms
: What is the implication of this? Should we move all facets to DocValues
: when we have high cardinality (lots of values) ? Are we adding it back?
1) Using DocValues is almost certainly a good idea moving forward for
situations where the FieldCache was used in the past.
: FieldCache is gone
available, which means you should be
> able to use it using the fcs algorithm.
>
> This should be the current situation,
> I will take a look into details and let you know if I understood something
> wrong.
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> 2015-10-06 5:03 GMT+01:00 William Bell :
So the FieldCache was removed from Solr 5.
>
> What is the implication of this? Should we move all facets to DocValues
> when we have high cardinality (lots of values) ? Are we adding it back?
>
> Other ideas to improve performance?
>
> From Mike M:
>
> FieldCache
So the FieldCache was removed from Solr 5.
What is the implication of this? Should we move all facets to DocValues
when we have high cardinality (lots of values) ? Are we adding it back?
Other ideas to improve performance?
>From Mike M:
FieldCache is gone (moved to a dedica
Hi I am using solr 5.3 and I have the same problem while doing json facet on
multivalued field. Below is the error stack trace :
2015-09-21 21:26:09,292 ERROR org.apache.solr.core.SolrCore ?
org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: can not use FieldCache on multivalued
field: FLAG
at
calculate them on multivalued fields?
org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: can not use FieldCache on
multivalued field: sales
at
org.apache.solr.schema.SchemaField.checkFieldCacheSource(SchemaField.java:187)
at org.apache.solr.schema.TrieField.getValueSource(TrieField.java:236
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 1:55 AM, Iana Bondarska wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm using json query api for solr 5.2. When query for metrics for
> multivalued fields, I get error:
> can not use FieldCache on multivalued field: sales.
>
> I've found in solr wiki that to avoid u
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015, at 06:55 AM, Iana Bondarska wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm using json query api for solr 5.2. When query for metrics for
> multivalued fields, I get error:
> can not use FieldCache on multivalued field: sales.
>
> I've found in solr wiki that to avoid u
Hi,
I'm using json query api for solr 5.2. When query for metrics for
multivalued fields, I get error:
can not use FieldCache on multivalued field: sales.
I've found in solr wiki that to avoid using fieldcache I should set
facet.method parameter to "enum".
Now my quest
For the fieldCache, what determines the entries_count?
Is each search request containing a sort on an non-docValues field
contribute one entry to the entries_count?
For example, search A ( q=owner:1&sort=maildate asc ) and search b (
q=owner:2&sort=maildate asc ) will contribute 2 fie
@William Firstly because I was sure that the ticket (or an equivalent) was
already opened but I just could not find it. Thanks @Manuel. Secondly
because I wanted to start the discussion, I have the feeling that the
compression of the documents, activated by default, can be a killer for
some applica
Why not just submit a JIRA issue - and add your patch so that we can all
benefit?
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 5:34 AM, Manuel Le Normand <
manuel.lenorm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is the issue SOLR-5478 what you were looking for?
>
--
Bill Bell
billnb...@gmail.com
cell 720-256-8076
Is the issue SOLR-5478 what you were looking for?
Dear Solr users,
we migrated our solution from Solr 4.0 to Solr 4.3 and we noticed a
degradation of the search performance. We compared the two versions and
found out that most of the time is spent in the decompression of the
retrievable fields in Solr 4.3. The block compression of the documents i
Mailing list by default removes attachments. So uploaded it to google drive
..
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-RnB4e-vaJhX280NVllMUdHYWs/edit?usp=sharing
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Umesh Prasad wrote:
> Hi All,
> We are seeing memory leaks in our Search application whenever core
On 9/12/13 3:28 PM, Toke Eskildsen wrote:
On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 14:48 +0200, Per Steffensen wrote:
Actually some months back I made PoC of a FieldCache that could expand
beyond the heap. Basically imagine a FieldCache with room for
"unlimited" data-arrays, that just behind the scen
On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 14:48 +0200, Per Steffensen wrote:
> Actually some months back I made PoC of a FieldCache that could expand
> beyond the heap. Basically imagine a FieldCache with room for
> "unlimited" data-arrays, that just behind the scenes goes to
> memory-mapped
Yes, thanks.
Actually some months back I made PoC of a FieldCache that could expand
beyond the heap. Basically imagine a FieldCache with room for
"unlimited" data-arrays, that just behind the scenes goes to
memory-mapped files when there is no more room on heap. Never finished
u, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:07 AM, Per Steffensen wrote:
> Thanks, guys. Now I know a little more about DocValues and realize that
> they will do the job wrt FieldCache.
>
> Regards, Per Steffensen
>
>
> On 9/12/13 3:11 AM, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
>
>> Per, check zee Wiki,
Thanks, guys. Now I know a little more about DocValues and realize that
they will do the job wrt FieldCache.
Regards, Per Steffensen
On 9/12/13 3:11 AM, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
Per, check zee Wiki, there is a page describing docvalues. We used them
successfully in a solr for analytics
>
>> The reason I mention sort is that we in my project, half a year ago, have
>> dealt with the FieldCache->OOM-problem when doing sort-requests. We
>> basically just reject sort-requests unless they hit below X documents - in
>> case they do we just find them withou
On 09/11/2013 08:40 AM, Per Steffensen wrote:
The reason I mention sort is that we in my project, half a year ago,
have dealt with the FieldCache->OOM-problem when doing sort-requests.
We basically just reject sort-requests unless they hit below X
documents - in case they do we just find t
The reason I mention sort is that we in my project, half a year ago,
have dealt with the FieldCache->OOM-problem when doing sort-requests. We
basically just reject sort-requests unless they hit below X documents -
in case they do we just find them without sorting and sort them
oursel
Sokolov <
msoko...@safaribooksonline.com> wrote:
> On 9/11/13 3:11 AM, Per Steffensen wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> We have a SolrCloud setup handling huge amounts of data. When we do
>> group, facet or sort searches Solr will use its FieldCache, and add data in
>> it for every sing
On 9/11/13 3:11 AM, Per Steffensen wrote:
Hi
We have a SolrCloud setup handling huge amounts of data. When we do
group, facet or sort searches Solr will use its FieldCache, and add
data in it for every single document we have. For us it is not
realistic that this will ever fit in memory and
Hi
We have a SolrCloud setup handling huge amounts of data. When we do
group, facet or sort searches Solr will use its FieldCache, and add data
in it for every single document we have. For us it is not realistic that
this will ever fit in memory and we get OOM exceptions. Are there some
way
memory, but that just means your JVM Heap has that memory
: > to spare and hasn't needed to clean them up yet.
:
: I don't think this is correct.
:
: When you register an entry in the fieldcache, it registers event
: listeners on the segment's core so that when its close()d, any ent
t think this is correct.
> :
> : When you register an entry in the fieldcache, it registers event
> : listeners on the segment's core so that when its close()d, any entries
> : are purged rather than waiting on GC.
> :
> : See FieldCacheImpl.java
>
> Ah ... sweet. I did
ith them, they might look like the
: > ytake upa log of memory, but that just means your JVM Heap has that memory
: > to spare and hasn't needed to clean them up yet.
:
: I don't think this is correct.
:
: When you register an entry in the fieldcache, it registers event
: listener
eeded to clean them up yet.
I don't think this is correct.
When you register an entry in the fieldcache, it registers event
listeners on the segment's core so that when its close()d, any entries
are purged rather than waiting on GC.
See FieldCacheImpl.java
: why? Those are my sort fields and they are occupying a lot of space (doubled
: in this case but I see that sometimes I have three or four "old" segment
: references)
:
: Is there something I can do to remove those old references? I tried to reload
: the core and it seems the old references are
slave
- on filesystem I see files belonging just to latest segment (which in
this case is called *_mx*)
- on admin console I see there's just one segment
- on stats page I see (FieldCache) references to both new and previous
(old) segment (*_mv and _mx*)
entries_count : 11
...
en
vertedField<http://wiki.apache.org/solr/UnInvertedField>.java.
Consider using one field for doing stats, and one for doing range facetting
on. "
I assume it referred to former version of Solr.
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Chris Hostetter
wrote:
>
> : Can I expect the F
: Can I expect the FieldCache of Lucene to return the correct values when
: working
: with TrieField with the precisionStep higher than 0. If not, what did I get
: wrong?
Yes -- the code for building FieldCaches from Trie fields is smart enough
to ensure that only the "real" original
Hello everyone,
I have a question about Solr TrieField and Lucene FieldCache.
>From my understanding, Solr added the implementation of TrieField to
perform faster range queries.
For each value it will index multiple terms. The n-th term being a masked
version of our value,
showing only it fi
Where do you get the docid from? Usually its best to just look at the whole
algorithm, e.g. docids come from per-segment readers by default anyway so
ideally you want to access any per-document things from that same
segmentreader.
As far as supporting docvalues, FieldCache API "passes thr
I have some custom code that uses the top-level FieldCache (e.g.,
FieldCache.DEFAULT.getLongs(reader, "foobar", false)). I'd like to redesign
this to use the per-segment FieldCaches so that re-opening a Searcher is
fast(er). In most cases, I've got a docId and I want to
Hi all,
I have some memory problems (OOM) with Solr 3.5.0 and I suppose that it has
something to do with the fieldCache. The entries count of the fieldCache
grows and grows, why is it not rebuilt after a commit? I commit every 60
seconds, but the memory consumption of Solr increased within one
-jar start.jar
[sanniere@funlevel-dx example2]$ java -Djetty.port=7574
-DzkHost=localhost:9983 -jar start.jar
2) used both grouping and faceting on the popularity field, then checked
the fieldcache insanity count
[sanniere@funlevel-dx example]$ curl -sS
"http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=*:*&
I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4866
Elodie
Le 07.05.2013 18:19, Chris Hostetter a écrit :
: I am using the Lucene FieldCache with SolrCloud and I have "insane" instances
: with messages like:
FWIW: I'm the one that named the result of
cases
>> against a Solr 4.2.1 Embedded Server. When faceting the groups, I want the
>> counts to reflect the number of groups, not the number of documents. But
>> when I enable "&group.facet=true" on the query, the test fails with the
>> following mess
estSearchByQuery(com.test.InsaneFieldCacheTest): Insane
> FieldCache usage(s) ***
> VALUEMISMATCH: Multiple distinct value objects for
> SegmentCoreReader(owner=_0(4.2.1):C12)+course_id
> 'SegmentCoreReader(owner=_0(4.2.1):C12)'=>'course_id',class
>
est fails with the
following message:
*** BEGIN testSearchByQuery(com.test.InsaneFieldCacheTest): Insane
FieldCache usage(s) ***
VALUEMISMATCH: Multiple distinct value objects for
SegmentCoreReader(owner=_0(4.2.1):C12)+course_id
'SegmentCoreReader(owner=_0(4.2.1):C12)&
: I am using the Lucene FieldCache with SolrCloud and I have "insane" instances
: with messages like:
FWIW: I'm the one that named the result of these "sanity checks"
"FieldCacheInsantity" and i have regretted it ever since -- a better label
would have be
Hello,
I am using the Lucene FieldCache with SolrCloud and I have "insane" instances
with messages like:
VALUEMISMATCH: Multiple distinct value objects for
SegmentCoreReader(owner=_11i(4.2.1):C4493997/853637)+merchantid
'SegmentCoreReader(owner=_11i(4.2.1):C4493997/853637
On 3/22/2013 8:54 AM, Per Steffensen wrote:
> Me too. I will find out soon - I hope! But re-indexing is kinda a
> problem for us, but we will figure out.
> Any "guide to re-index all you stuff" anywhere, so I do it the easiest
> way? Guess maybe there are some nice tricks about steaming data direct
On 3/21/13 10:50 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
On 3/21/2013 4:05 AM, Per Steffensen wrote:
Can anyone else elaborate? How to "activate" it? How to make sure, for
sorting, that sort-field-value for all docs are not read into memory for
sorting - leading to OOM when you have a lot of docs? Can this feat
On 3/21/2013 4:05 AM, Per Steffensen wrote:
Can anyone else elaborate? How to "activate" it? How to make sure, for
sorting, that sort-field-value for all docs are not read into memory for
sorting - leading to OOM when you have a lot of docs? Can this feature
be activated on top of an existing 4.0
On 3/21/13 10:52 AM, Toke Eskildsen wrote:
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 09:57 +0100, Per Steffensen wrote:
Thanks Toke! Can you please elaborate a little bit? How to use it? What
it is supposed to do for you?
Sorry, no, I only know about it on the abstract level. The release notes
for Solr 4.2 says
*
On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 09:57 +0100, Per Steffensen wrote:
> Thanks Toke! Can you please elaborate a little bit? How to use it? What
> it is supposed to do for you?
Sorry, no, I only know about it on the abstract level. The release notes
for Solr 4.2 says
* DocValues have been integrated into Solr
ALL docs under the
Solr-node is added to the FieldCache. [...]
I haven't used it yet, but DocValues in Solr 4.2 seems to be the answer.
- Toke Eskildsen
Thanks Toke! Can you please elaborate a little bit? How to use it? What
it is supposed to do for you?
Regards, Per Steffensen
Solr-node is added to the FieldCache. [...]
I haven't used it yet, but DocValues in Solr 4.2 seems to be the answer.
- Toke Eskildsen
Hi
We have a lot of docs in Solr. Each particular Solr-node handles a lot
of docs distributed among several replica. When you issue a sort query,
it seems to me that, the value of the sort-field of ALL docs under the
Solr-node is added to the FieldCache. This leads to OOM-exceptions at
some
s will read each
> document from
> the index _on disk_ and retrieve the myUniqueKey field value for each
> document.
>
> My idea is to have a FieldCache for the myUniqueKey field in
> SolrIndexSearcher (or somewhere
> else?) that would be used in cases where the only field th
Thank you very much!
I've singlelined, spaced removed every fl field in my solrconfig and now
the app works fine
Giovanni
Il 05/10/12 20:49, Chris Hostetter ha scritto:
: So extracting the attachment you will be able to track down what appens
:
: this is the query that shows the error, and b
: So extracting the attachment you will be able to track down what appens
:
: this is the query that shows the error, and below you can see the latest stack
: trace and the qt definition
Awesome -- exactly what we needed.
I've reproduced your problem, and verified that it has something to do
w
see the latest
stack trace and the qt definition
i'm using solr version "4.0.0-BETA 1370099 - rmuir - 2012-08-06 22:50:47"
http://src-eprice-dev:8080/solr/test/select?q=ciao&wt=xml&qt=eprice
SEVERE: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: can not use FieldCache on
multiv
l stack trace -- and we have to ask lots of follow up questions to get
the basic info about what/how you got an error, it really makes it hard to
help diagnose problems)
: Oct 3, 2012 3:07:38 PM org.apache.solr.common.SolrException log
: SEVERE: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: can not us
Here is the stack trace
Oct 3, 2012 3:07:38 PM org.apache.solr.common.SolrException log
SEVERE: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: can not use FieldCache on
multivalued field: store_slug
at
org.apache.solr.schema.SchemaField.checkFieldCacheSource(SchemaField.java:174)
at
: I'm also using that field for a facet:
Hmmm... that still doesn't make sense. faceting can use FieldCache, but
it will check if ht field is mutivalued to decide if/when/how to do this.
There's nothing else in your requestHandler config that would suggest why
you might get t
the error
can not use FieldCache on multivalued field: store_slug
But if I instead run the query
http://src-eprice-dev:8080/solr/0/select/?q=*:*&qt=mytype&fl=otherfield,mymultivaluedfiled
I don't get the error
Have you got any suggestions?
I'm using solr 4 beta
solr-spec
Hi Yonik,
I've been attempting to fix the SUBREADER insanity in our custom
component, and have made perhaps some progress (or is this worse?) -
I've gone from SUBREADER to VALUEMISMATCH insanity:
---snip---
entries_count : 12
entry#0 :
'MMapIndexInput(path="/io01/p/solr/playlist/c/playlist/index/
current solrconfig.xml definition and add the field in
> the fl specification.
>
> Unexpectedly when I do the query q=*:*&qt=mytype I get the error
>
>
> can not use FieldCache on multivalued field: store_slug
>
>
> But if I instead run the query
>
> http://src-e
Hello,
I would like to put a multivalued field into a qt definition as output
field. to do this I edit the current solrconfig.xml definition and add
the field in the fl specification.
Unexpectedly when I do the query q=*:*&qt=mytype I get the error
can not use FieldCache on multiva
Yonik, et al.
I believe I found the section of code pushing me into 'insanity' status:
---snip---
int[] collapseIDs = null;
float[] hotnessValues = null;
String[] artistIDs = null;
try {
collapseIDs =
FieldCache.DEFAULT.getInts(searcher.getIndexReader(),
> already-optimized, single-segment index
That part is interesting... if true, then the type of "insanity" you
saw should be impossible, and either the insanity detection or
something else is broken.
-Yonik
http://lucidworks.com
>
> > Tomás
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Aaron Daubman
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> In reviewing a solr instance with somewhat variable performance, I
> >> noticed that its fieldCache stat
1 - 100 of 206 matches
Mail list logo
