Hi Edward,
Thanks a lot for your reply!
Subquery is what I had in mind, too, for designs 1) and 3) to bring
back the other side of the relationship. Except that I always queries
movies and subqueried users.
If I do it the other way around, like you did, then I'm able to
filter. I can't quite fil
Just for the sake of an imagined scenario, you could use the [subquery] doc
transformer. A query like the one below:
/select?q=family: Smith&fq=watched_movies:[* TO *]&fl=*,
movies:[subquery]&movies.q={!terms f=id v=$row.watched_movies}
Would bring back the results below:
{ "responseHeader":{
Hello Solr users,
How would you design a filtered join scenario?
Say I have a bunch of movies (excuse any inaccuracies, this is an
imagined scenario):
curl -XPOST -H 'Content-Type: application/json'
'localhost:8983/solr/test/update?commitWithin=1000' --data-binary '
[{
"id": "1",
"title": "Rambo
ection join in Solr 5.x
I have done it by extending the solr join plugin. Needed to override 2
methods from join plugin and it works out.
Thanks,
Susmit
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Mikhail Khludnev <
mkhlud...@griddynamics.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There is no muc
I have done it by extending the solr join plugin. Needed to override 2
methods from join plugin and it works out.
Thanks,
Susmit
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Mikhail Khludnev <
mkhlud...@griddynamics.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There is no much progress on
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/brow
Hello,
There is no much progress on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8297
Although it's really achievable.
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Shikha Somani wrote:
> Greetings,
>
>
> Background: Our application is using Solr 4.10 and has multiple
> collections all of them sharded equally
Greetings,
Background: Our application is using Solr 4.10 and has multiple collections all
of them sharded equally on Solr. These collections were joined to support
complex queries.
Problem: We are trying to upgrade to Solr 5.x. However from Solr 5.2 onward to
join two collections it is a re
available to the general
> public. Is there any URL where they post their nightly build?
>
> Thanks in advance
> Rajesh Panneerselvam
>
> From: Mikhail Khludnev [via Lucene] [mailto:
> ml-node+s472066n4174700...@n3.nabble.com]
> Sent: 17-Dec-14 15:05
> To: Rajesh Panneers
On 12/31/2014 12:19 AM, Rajesh wrote:
> Is there a way to get the trunk and I can update the same patch to check this
> functionality. If so, where can I get the trunk build?
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToContribute#Getting_the_source_code
You will need a number of software components, includi
ty. If so, where can I get the trunk build?
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-in-SOLR-tp4173930p4176678.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--
Sincerely yours
Mikhail Khludnev
Princip
Is there a way to get the trunk and I can update the same patch to check this
functionality. If so, where can I get the trunk build?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-in-SOLR-tp4173930p4176678.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at
On 12/30/2014 11:44 PM, Rajesh wrote:
> Oh! Thanks Mikhail. But I could see a comment in that JIRA, above your
> comment which is from Thomas champagne that the patch was committed to
> current trunk. Is it not for this issue Mikhail?
The message from Thomas Champagne indicates that he updated t
+s472066n4176668...@n3.nabble.com]
Sent: 31-Dec-14 11:52
To: Rajesh Panneerselvam
Subject: Re: Join in SOLR
Rajesh,
Nohow. Jira is still open, the patch wasn't committed anywhere.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Rajesh <[hidden
email]>
wrote:
> Mikhail,
>
> How can I get a nightly bui
e general
> public. Is there any URL where they post their nightly build?
>
> Thanks in advance
> Rajesh Panneerselvam
>
> From: Mikhail Khludnev [via Lucene] [mailto:
> ml-node+s472066n4174700...@n3.nabble.com]
> Sent: 17-Dec-14 15:05
> To: Rajesh Panneerselvam
> Subject
ucene]
[mailto:ml-node+s472066n4174700...@n3.nabble.com]
Sent: 17-Dec-14 15:05
To: Rajesh Panneerselvam
Subject: Re: Join in SOLR
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Rajesh Panneerselvam <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Yes Mikhail. This is what I want exactly. My sub-entities should be
> add
ime soon?
>
Rajesh, it's a question to committers, you can leave a comment and/or vote
for an issue.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Rajesh Panneerselvam
>
>
>
> *From:* Mikhail Khludnev [mailto:mkhlud...@griddynamics.com]
> *Sent:* 17-Dec-14 12:43
> *To:* Rajesh Pa
Hello Rajesh,
Please find the brief below
>
> Thanks Mikhail. As per what you have mentioned can I get a list of sub
> entities with this new Zipper join. Because now in existing DIH I'm getting
> a list for individual fields of the sub entities.
>
> 1) If I get a list of sub entities how can I g
message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-in-SOLR-tp4173930p4174679.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> Using a database view that does the JOIN on the server side is pretty
> much guaranteed to have far better performance. Database software is
> very good at doing joins efficiently when proper DB indexes are
> available ... the dataimport han
On 12/12/2014 5:16 AM, Tomoko Uchida wrote:
> I cannot find out your table structure and Solr schema,
> but if your requirement is too complex to handle by DIH, you could handle
> it by rich database functionality.
>
> I think creating a database view is good choice...
>
> (Of course, other exper
ields name, id, desc. I'm getting a list
> for name, another list for id and another one for desc.
>
> Is there a way how I can get List of sub entities.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-in-SOLR-tp4173930p4173977.html
ing a list
for name, another list for id and another one for desc.
Is there a way how I can get List of sub entities.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-in-SOLR-tp4173930p4173977.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Thank you for config information.
Three tables have relation (by foreign key) ?
You might want to have one nested tag in rather than 3
one in .
By using nested tag, you may able to merge tables *before*
importing them to Solr. All works done by SQL.
You have already seen this wiki? If not, ex
Thanks for your reply Tomoko. My data-config file looks like the below.
Each entity represents a table in DB. Now, If I want to join these three
tables, can I make use of the SOLR join functionality..
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-in-SOLR
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-in-SOLR-tp4173930.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
les.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-in-SOLR-tp4173930.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Please read:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
and the contained link:
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:03 AM, Kamal Kishore
wrote:
> NO reply from anybody..seems strange ?
>
>
> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Kamal Kishore
> wrote:
>
>> Any
There are two previous threads in the list that i think can help you,
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/201405.mbox/%3c1398929537117-4134045.p...@n3.nabble.com%3E
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/201404.mbox/%3c20140403114242.horde.epx2xawezs3mvmt
You really have to provide more detail here.
bq: Moreover, solr is not allowing to get data from both the core.
What do you mean? the second core is unavailable? Solr joins
do not return data from the "from" table. I really suggest you
try denormalizing the data first, don't try to use Solr like
Probably because we answered a nearly identical request yesterday. It had items
in one core and counts in a different. Please read all the responses to this
e-mail.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/201405.mbox/browser
Specifically, these responses:
http://mail-archives
Any updates guys ?
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Kamal Kishore
wrote:
> Dear Team,
>
> I have two solr cores. One containing products information and second has
> customers points. I am looking at solr join to query on first product core
> & boost the results based on customer points in second
NO reply from anybody..seems strange ?
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Kamal Kishore
wrote:
> Any updates guys ?
>
>
> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Kamal Kishore > wrote:
>
>> Dear Team,
>>
>> I have two solr cores. One containing products information and second has
>> customers points. I am
Dear Team,
I have two solr cores. One containing products information and second has
customers points. I am looking at solr join to query on first product core
& boost the results based on customer points in second core. I am not able
to frame solr query for this.
Moreover, solr is not allowing t
this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Equivalent-of-SQL-JOIN-in-SOLR-across-multiple-cores-tp4106152p4106344.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-BlockJoinQueryParsers
An open jira : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4787
On Wednesday, December 11, 2013 4:28 PM, bijalcm wrote:
1, Are the cores join-able?
2. Could you give me an example about how to write a multiple core join?
3. Can we do equivalent of JOIN in SOLR across
1, Are the cores join-able?
2. Could you give me an example about how to write a multiple core join?
3. Can we do equivalent of JOIN in SOLR across multiple cores
Select T1.*,T2.*
FROM Table1 T1,Table2 T2
WHERE T1.id = T2.id
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene
4 beta.
> Is there a "join" in Solr 3.6?
> Thanks,
> Peter
Hi. I have read there is "join" functionality in Solr 4 beta.
Is there a "join" in Solr 3.6?
Thanks,
Peter
On 17.01.2008 23:48 Chris Hostetter wrote:
assuming these are simple delimited files, something like the unix "join"
command can do this for you ... then your indexing code can just process
on file linerally. (if they aren't simple delimited files, you can
preprocess them to strip out the exc
: I don't have an index to check. Both sources come in huge text files, one of
: them daily, the other irregular. One has the ID, the other has a different ID
: that must be mapped first to the ID of the first source. So there is no easy
: way of saying: "Give me the record to this ID from the oth
Good Luck! You're right, there *is* a lot to
learn. I get both excited and frustrated by
new stuff, which is much better than having
my skill set only comprised of, say, only
being able to work with old "C" code.
Before getting fancy at all, I'd find out what the total
size of my index will
On 17.01.2008 18:32 Erick Erickson wrote:
There's some cost here, and I don't know how this
all plays with the sizes of your indexes. It may be
totally impractical.
Anyway, back to work.
I think I will have to play with the different possibilities and see
what fits best to my situation. Ther
See below:
On Jan 17, 2008 11:42 AM, Michael Lackhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 17.01.2008 16:53 Erick Erickson wrote:
>
> > I would *strongly* encourage you to store them together
> > as one document. There's no real method of doing
> > DB like joins in the underlying Lucene search engine.
On 17.01.2008 16:53 Erick Erickson wrote:
I would *strongly* encourage you to store them together
as one document. There's no real method of doing
DB like joins in the underlying Lucene search engine.
Thanks, that was also my preference.
But that's generic advice. The question I have for you
I would *strongly* encourage you to store them together
as one document. There's no real method of doing
DB like joins in the underlying Lucene search engine.
But that's generic advice. The question I have for you is
"What's the big deal about coordinating the sources?"
That is, you have to have s
Hello,
I have two sources of data for the same "things" to search. It is book
data in a library. First there is the usual bibliographic data (author,
title...) and then I have scanned and OCRed table of contents data about
the same books. Both are updated independently.
Now I don't know how t
I'm quite open to NOT having a JOIN in Solr if flattening the model
still provides the querying capability desired. I've not fully
followed the specifics that Yonik has mentioned on this thread, but
it certainly is the case that denormalizing/flattening our domain
does not ex
oops!!! I meant to reply directly to Brian - an old friend of mine
from graduate school...
next time I'll check the reply-to button more closely.
I share my dream with Ryan. My dream API looks like this, sticking
with the artist/track metaphor, in which we have metadata, say the
...
you share my dream! thats amazing!
I really hope eric persists with the JOIN direction... (its would be
great to get the Lucene in Action guys working on
On 2/3/07, Walter Underwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We would never use JOIN. We denormalize for speed. Not a big deal.
I'm looking at an application where speed is not the only concern. If
I can remove the need for a 'normalized' and 'denormalized' form it
would be a HUGE win. Essentially
I would LOVE to see a JOIN in SOLR.
I have an index of artists, albums, and songs. The artists have
lots
of metadata and the songs very little. I'd love to be able to
search
for songs using the artist metadata. Right now, I have to add
all the
metadata for each artist and album to eac
We would never use JOIN. We denormalize for speed. Not a big deal.
wunder
==
Search Guru, Netflix
On 2/3/07 11:16 AM, "Brian Whitman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 2, 2007, at 4:46 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
>
>> I would LOVE to see a JOIN in SOLR.
>&
On Feb 2, 2007, at 4:46 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
I would LOVE to see a JOIN in SOLR.
I have an index of artists, albums, and songs. The artists have lots
of metadata and the songs very little. I'd love to be able to search
for songs using the artist metadata. Right now, I have to ad
53 matches
Mail list logo
