Re: Possible bug on LTR when using solr 8.6.3 - index out of bounds DisiPriorityQueue.add(DisiPriorityQueue.java:102)

Hello, Christine and thank you for your help! So, we've investigated further based on your suggestions and have the following things to note: Reproducibility: We can reproduce the same queries on multiple runs, with the same error. Data as a factor: Our setup is single-sharded, so we can't invest

Re: Possible bug in cluster status - > solr 8.3

AFAIK these collection properties are not tracked that faithfully and can get out of sync, mostly because they are used only during collection CREATE and BACKUP / RESTORE and not during other collection operations or during searching / indexing. SPLITSHARD doesn’t trust them, instead it checks t

Re: Possible bug in cluster status - > solr 8.3

It seems like an issue to me. Can you open a JIRA with these details? On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 10:51 AM Jacek Kikiewicz wrote: > > I found interesting situation, I've created a collection with only one > replica. > Then I scaled solr-cloud cluster, and run 'addreplica' call to add 2 more. > So

Re: Possible bug in Solrj-6.6.0

Yes that is correct. Joel Bernstein http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Aman Deep Singh wrote: > Thanks Joel, > It is working now > One quick question,as you say that we can use solr client cache multiple > time so can I create a single instance of solr client cache a

Re: Possible bug in Solrj-6.6.0

Thanks Joel, It is working now One quick question,as you say that we can use solr client cache multiple time so can I create a single instance of solr client cache and use it again and again ,since we are using one single bean for client object. On 16-Jun-2017 6:28 PM, "Joel Bernstein" wrote: T

Re: Possible bug in Solrj-6.6.0

The issue is that in 6.6 CloudSolrStream is expecting a StreamContext to be set. So you'll need to update your code to do this. This was part of changes made to make streaming work in non-SolrCloud environments. You also need to create a SolrClientCache which caches the SolrClients. Example: Sol

Re: Possible bug

Thanks for reporting. This was fixed by , which will be included in forthcoming Solr 6.5.1. -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 6, 2017, at 12:54 PM, OTH wrote: > > I'm not sure if any one else had this problem, but this is a problem I had: >

Re: [Possible Bug] 5.5.0 Startup script ignoring host parameter?

On 30/03/16 16:45, Shawn Heisey wrote: > The host parameter does not control binding to network interfaces. It > controls what hostname is published to zookeeper when running in cloud mode. Oh I see. That wasn't clear from the documentation. Might be worth adding such a parameter to the startup s

Re: [possible bug]: [child] - ChildDocTransformerFactory returns top level documents nested under middle level documents when queried for the middle level ones

I'm not the best person to comment on this so perhaps someone could chime in as well, but can you try using a wildcard for your childFilter? Something like: childFilter=type_s:doc.enriched.text.* You could also possibly enrich the document with depth information and use that for filtering out. On

Re: [Possible Bug] 5.5.0 Startup script ignoring host parameter?

On 3/30/2016 5:45 AM, Bram Van Dam wrote: > It looks like the "-h" parameter isn't being processed correctly. I want > Solr to listen on 127.0.0.1, but instead it binds to all interfaces. Am > I doing something wrong? Or am I misinterpreting what the -h parameter > is for? The host parameter does

Re: Possible Bug - MDC handling in org.apache.solr.common.util.ExecutorUtil.MDCAwareThreadPoolExecutor.execut e(Runnable)

: Not sure I'm onboard with the first proposed solution, but yes, I'd open a : JIRA issue to discuss. we should standardize the context keys to use use fully qualified (org.apache.solr.*) java class name prefixes -- just like we do with the logger names themselves. : : - Mark : : On Mon, Jan

Re: Possible Bug - MDC handling in org.apache.solr.common.util.ExecutorUtil.MDCAwareThreadPoolExecutor.execute(Runnable)

Not sure I'm onboard with the first proposed solution, but yes, I'd open a JIRA issue to discuss. - Mark On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:01 AM Konstantin Hollerith wrote: > Hi, > > I'm using SLF4J MDC to log additional Information in my WebApp. Some of my > MDC-Parameters even include Line-Breaks. >

Re: Possible bug with searchers and core swapping

On 10/23/2015 5:27 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > Today I noticed this on my dev server running Solr 5.2.1: > > https://www.dropbox.com/s/bt81sv35acb7q2n/searcher-from-old-corename.png?dl=0 > On the index with the problem, I am using one third-party plugin with a > schema component and an update proc

Re: Possible bug in Solr JoinQParserPlugin?!

Done https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2824 On 12-10-2011 0:47, Chris Hostetter wrote: : I have the following query : /core1/select?q=*:*&fq={!join from=id to=childIds fromIndex=core2}specials:1&fl=id,name ... : org.apache.solr.search.JoinQParserPlugin$1.parse(JoinQParserPlugi

Re: Possible bug in Solr JoinQParserPlugin?!

: I have the following query : /core1/select?q=*:*&fq={!join from=id to=childIds fromIndex=core2}specials:1&fl=id,name ... : org.apache.solr.search.JoinQParserPlugin$1.parse(JoinQParserPlugin.java:60) : the parse is called for the filterquery on the main core (core1). Not the : core of th

Re: Possible bug in Solr JoinQParserPlugin?!

Hi Can someone help me confirm this. Or should I create a ticket? Thijs On 7-10-2011 10:10, Thijs wrote: Hi I think I might have found a bug in the JoinQParser. But I want to verify this first before creating a issue. I have two cores with 2 different schema's now I want to join between

Re: Possible bug in FastVectorHighlighter

Worked fine. Thanks a lot! Massimo On 09/08/2011 11:58, Jayendra Patil wrote: Try using - Regards, Jayendra On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Massimo Schiavon wrote: In my Solr (3.3) configuration I specified these two params: when I do a simple search I obtain correctly h

Re: Possible bug in FastVectorHighlighter

Try using - Regards, Jayendra On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Massimo Schiavon wrote: > In my Solr (3.3) configuration I specified these two params: > > > > > when I do a simple search I obtain correctly highlighted results where > matches areenclosed with correct tag. > If I do

Re: Possible bug in Solr 3.3 grouping

Thanks Martijn - I should be able to patch the Solr 3.3 release based on r1145748. - Nikhil From: Martijn v Groningen To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; Nikhil Chhaochharia Sent: Wednesday, 13 July 2011 2:04 AM Subject: Re: Possible bug in Solr 3.3 grouping Hi

Re: Possible bug in Solr 3.3 grouping

Hi Nikhil, Thanks for raising this issue. I checked this particular issue in a test case and I ran into the same error, so this is indeed a bug. I've fixed this issue for 3x in revision 1145748. So checking out the latest 3x branch and building Solr yourself should give you this bug fix. Or you ca

Re: Possible bug in query sorting

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Pablo Recio wrote: > That's my schema XML: >   >     >       >       >       >       >     >     >       >       ignoreCase="true" expand="true"/> >       >       >       >     >   >   > >   [...] >   required="true" multiValued="false" omitNorms="f

Re: Possible bug in query sorting

That's my schema XML: link text ... 2010/10/28 Gora Mohanty > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Michael McCandless > wrote: > >

Re: Possible bug in query sorting

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Michael McCandless wrote: > Is it somehow possible that you are trying to sort by a multi-valued field? [...] Either that, or or your field gets processed into multiple tokens via the analyzer/tokenizer path in your schema. The reported error is a consequence of t

Re: Possible bug in query sorting

Is it somehow possible that you are trying to sort by a multi-valued field? Mike On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 6:59 AM, Pablo Recio wrote: > Hi all. I'm having a problem with solr sorting search results. > > When I try to make a query and sort it by title: > > http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*%3A

Re: possible bug in sorting by Function?

: issue resolve. problem was that solr.war was silently not being overwritten : by new version. : : will try to spend more time debugging before posting. Glad you were able to figure it out. For future refrence: problems like these are pretty much impossible for people to help you with unless

Re: possible bug in sorting by Function?

issue resolve. problem was that solr.war was silently not being overwritten by new version. will try to spend more time debugging before posting. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/possible-bug-in-sorting-by-Function-tp1118235p1121349.html Sent from the Solr -

Re: possible bug in sorting by Function?

problem could be related to some oddity in sum()?? some more examples: note: Latitude and Longitude are fields of type=double works: http://10.0.11.54:8994/solr/select?q=*:*&sort=sum(sum(1,1.0))%20asc http://10.0.11.54:8994/solr/select?q=*:*&sort=sum(Latitude,Latitude)%20asc http://10.0.11.54:8

Re: possible bug in sorting by Function?

small typo in last email: second sum should have been hsin, but I notice that the problem also occurs when I leave it as sum -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/possible-bug-in-sorting-by-Function-tp1118235p1118260.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list arc

Re: Possible bug with commands to manage cores

Thanks, I apreciate the fast you did that. Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ्-2 wrote: > > fixed > > 2009/6/19 Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ् : >> could I fix it myself adding the php RW in there? >> >> nope. the core admin does not have a place where you can add a writer >> >> 2009/6/19 Noble Paul നോബിള്‍

Re: Possible bug with commands to manage cores

fixed 2009/6/19 Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ् : > could I fix it myself adding the php RW in there? > > nope. the core admin does not have a place where you can add a writer > > 2009/6/19 Noble Paul നോബിള്‍  नोब्ळ् : >> hi mark, >> yes . But i shall fix it anyway >> >> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Re: Possible bug with commands to manage cores

could I fix it myself adding the php RW in there? nope. the core admin does not have a place where you can add a writer 2009/6/19 Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ् : > hi mark, > yes . But i shall fix it anyway > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Marc Sturlese wrote: >> >> So, shouldn't it be happening

Re: Possible bug with commands to manage cores

hi mark, yes . But i shall fix it anyway On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Marc Sturlese wrote: > > So, shouldn't it be happening in current trunk? I have looked at the > patch-1121 and php response writers doesn't apear... could I fix it myself > adding the php RW in there? > > Noble Paul നോബിള്‍

Re: Possible bug with commands to manage cores

So, shouldn't it be happening in current trunk? I have looked at the patch-1121 and php response writers doesn't apear... could I fix it myself adding the php RW in there? Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ्-2 wrote: > > this should have happened because of the fix for SOLR-1121 > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009

Re: Possible bug with commands to manage cores

this should have happened because of the fix for SOLR-1121 On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Marc Sturlese wrote: > > I have noticed that the response of the commands to deal with the cores > administration can't show the result using php or phps reponseWriter. > Despite passing the command wt=php

Re: Possible bug with sdouble?

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Jonathan Ariel wrote: > Hi everyone! > So it seems like I ran into a bug with sdouble. > I have a document with two fields. > field1 is double > > stored="true" omitNorms="true"/> > indexed="true" stored="true" omitNorms="true"/> > > when I index I send for both o

Re: Possible bug with sdouble?

I'll do the obvious one first. :) Have you tried Solr 1.3 or, even better, 1.4-dev nightly? Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch - Original Message > From: Jonathan Ariel > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 2:56:03 PM > Sub

Re: Possible bug in copyField

On 8/28/06, jason rutherglen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Could someone point me to where in the Solr code the Analyzer is applied to a query parser field? The lucene query parser normally does analysis. It also does things like making phrase queries from field that return multiple tokens. -Yo

Re: Possible bug in copyField

Could someone point me to where in the Solr code the Analyzer is applied to a query parser field? - Original Message From: Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 11:13:25 AM Subject: Re: Possible bug in copyField On

Re: Possible bug in copyField

play with searching with or without stemming on the query side. Erik - Original Message From: Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Cc: jason rutherglen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 7:33:48 AM Subject: Re: Possi

Re: Possible bug in copyField

Subject: Re: Possible bug in copyField On 8/28/06, Chris Hostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > : By looking at what is stored. Has this worked for others? > > the "stored" value of a field is allways going to be the pre-analyzed text > -- that's why the stored valu

Re: Possible bug in copyField

On 8/28/06, Chris Hostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : By looking at what is stored. Has this worked for others? the "stored" value of a field is allways going to be the pre-analyzed text -- that's why the stored values in your "text" fields still have upper case characters and stop words.

Re: Possible bug in copyField

: By looking at what is stored. Has this worked for others? the "stored" value of a field is allways going to be the pre-analyzed text -- that's why the stored values in your "text" fields still have upper case characters and stop words. what matters is whether or not the "indexed" terms of you

Re: Possible bug in copyField

By looking at what is stored. Has this worked for others? - Original Message From: Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; jason rutherglen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 6:35:43 PM Subject: Re: Possible bug in copyField On 8/

Re: Possible bug in copyField

On 8/25/06, jason rutherglen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: When doing a copyField into a text field that is supposed to be stemmed I'm not seeing the stemming occur. How did you determine that stemming didn't occur? -Yonik