[mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com]
Sent: 20 August 2015 00:44
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Performance issue with FILTER QUERY
If you're committing that rapidly then you're correct, filter caching may not
be a good fit. The entire _point_ of filter caching is to increase perfo
fectively
>> uses cache and hence it slow every time in our case.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Toke Eskildsen [mailto:t...@statsbiblioteket.dk]
>> Sent: 19 August 2015 12:16
>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Performance issue with FILTER Q
gt; added document available for search). Due to which it is not effectively
> uses cache and hence it slow every time in our case.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Toke Eskildsen [mailto:t...@statsbiblioteket.dk]
> Sent: 19 August 2015 12:16
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>
Hello,
try to experiment with fq={!cache=false}... or fq={!cache=false cost=100}...
see https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Common+Query+Parameters
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Maulin Rathod wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11627427/solr-query-q-or-filter-q
-
From: Toke Eskildsen [mailto:t...@statsbiblioteket.dk]
Sent: 19 August 2015 12:16
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Performance issue with FILTER QUERY
On Wed, 2015-08-19 at 05:55 +, Maulin Rathod wrote:
> SLOW WITH FILTER QUERY (takes more than 1 sec
On Wed, 2015-08-19 at 05:55 +, Maulin Rathod wrote:
> SLOW WITH FILTER QUERY (takes more than 1 second)
>
>
> q=+recipient_id:(4042) AND project_id:(332) AND resource_id:(13332247
> 13332245 13332243 13332241 13332239) AND entity_type:(2) AND -acti
