This probably carried forward from a very old version organically. I
am running 7.7
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 6:25 PM Erick Erickson wrote:
>
> What version of Solr are you using? ‘cause 8x has this definition for
> _version_
>
>
>
>
> and I find no text like you’re seeing in any schema file i
What version of Solr are you using? ‘cause 8x has this definition for _version_
and I find no text like you’re seeing in any schema file in 8x….
So with a prior version, “try it and see”? See:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9449 and linked JIRAs,
the _version_ can be indexed=“fal
Yes but "the _version_ field is also a non-indexed, non-stored single
valued docValues field;" <- is that a problem?
My schema has this:
I don't know if I use the updateLog or not. How can I find out?
I think that would work for me as I could just make a dynamic fild like:
---
Yes it i
Have you seen “In-place updates”?
See:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_1/updating-parts-of-documents.html
Then use the field as part of a function query. Since it’s non-indexed, you
won’t be searching on it. That said, you can do a lot with function queries
to satisfy use-cases.
Best.
Er
Hi, Paresh.
I'm afraid the only way is to join them back in post processing
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/6_6/transforming-result-documents.html#TransformingResultDocuments-_subquery_
Although, I'm not sure it will ever work with particular collections.
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 3:42 PM Pares
I see, thank you very much!
> -Original Message-
> From: Mikhail Khludnev [mailto:m...@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 6:45 PM
> To: solr-user
> Subject: Re: join query and new searcher on joined collection
>
> It doesn't invalidate anything. It j
It doesn't invalidate anything. It just doesn't matches to the join query
from older collection2 see
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/b7f99fe55a6fb6e7b38828676750b3512d6899a1/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/search/JoinQParserPlugin.java#L570
So, after commit collection2 following join
Thanx, Mikhail for reply
> collection1 has no idea about new searcher in collection2.
I suspected it. :)
So, when "join" query arrives searcher on collection1 has no chance to use
filter cache, stored before.
I suppose it invalidates filter cache, am I right?
&fq={!join score=none from=id fromI
collection1 has no idea about new searcher in collection2.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 1:18 PM Vadim Ivanov <
vadim.iva...@spb.ntk-intourist.ru> wrote:
> Sory, I've sent unfinished message
> So, query on collection1
> q=*:*{!join score=none from=id fromIndex=collection2 to=field1}*:*
>
> The question
Sory, I've sent unfinished message
So, query on collection1
q=*:*{!join score=none from=id fromIndex=collection2 to=field1}*:*
The question is what happened with autowarming and new searchers on
collection1 when new searcher starts on collection2?
IMHO when request with join comes it's impossible
Hi,
AFAIK Solr can join only local indexes. No matter whether you join the same
collection or two different ones.
So, in your case shard1 will be joined to shard1 and shard2 to shard2.
Unfortunately it's hard to say from your data which document resides in which
shard, but you can test using &
Hi Nitin,
Probably you can look at the Streaming Expressions here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Streaming+Expressions
This is available from Solr 6.
Regards,
Edwin
On 28 February 2017 at 16:45, Nitin Kumar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can we use join query for more than 2 cores in so
If it helps to clarify any, here's the full query:
/select
?
q=*:*
&
fq=type:ProjectGroup
&
fq={!join from=project_id_i to=project_id_im}user_id_i:65615 -role_id_i:18
type:UserRole
We have two Solr servers that were indexed from the same database. One of
the servers is running Solr 4.2, while th
Is it available in Solr 3.5 or is there a way to do something similar in
Solr 3.5,
Hi Sohail,
http://search-lucene.com/?q=Join&fc_project=Solr
Hit #1.
Otis
Performance Monitoring for Solr / ElasticSearch / HBase -
http://sematext.com/spm
- Original Message -
> From: Sohail Aboobaker
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 1
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
>> Hello-
>>
>> I'm looking for a way to find all the links from a set of results. Consider:
>>
>>
>> id:1
>> type:X
>> link:a
>> link:b
>>
>>
>>
>> id:2
>> type:X
>> link:a
>>
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote:
> Hello-
>
> I'm looking for a way to find all the links from a set of results. Consider:
>
>
> id:1
> type:X
> link:a
> link:b
>
>
>
> id:2
> type:X
> link:a
> link:c
>
>
>
> id:3
> type:Y
> link:a
>
>
> Is there a way to sea
17 matches
Mail list logo