case.
Testing environment: Solr 7.0.1, 1 core with 70GB data (~1.000.000 documents),
no shards
Akos
-Original Message-
From: Mikhail Khludnev [mailto:m...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2017 8:38 AM
To: solr-user
Subject: Re: Result grouping performance
Akos,
Can you provide
Akos,
Can you provide your request params? Do you just group and/or count grouped
facets?
Can you clarify how field collapsing is different from grouping, just make
it unambiguous?
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Kempelen, Ákos <
akos.kempe...@wolterskluwer.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am migrati
Have you enabled docValues (and reindexed from scratch) on the field
you're grouping on?
Best,
Erick
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:13 AM, Kempelen, Ákos
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am migrating our codebase from Solr 4.7 to 7.0.1 but the performance of
> result grouping seems very poor using the newer So
I’ll also mention the choice to improve processing speed by allocating more
memory, which increases the importance of GC tuning. This bit me when I tried
using it on a larger index.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9125
I don’t know if the result grouping feature shares the same issue
Also as you consider using collapse you'll want to keep in mind the feature
compromises that were made to achieve the higher performance:
1) Collapse does not directly support faceting. It simply collapses the
results and the faceting components compute facets on the collapsed result
set. Grouping
Originally collapsing was designed with a very small feature set and one
goal in mind: High performance collapsing on high cardinality fields. To
avoid having to compromise on that goal, it was developed as a separate
feature.
The trick in combining grouping and collapsing into one feature, is to
Thank you for posting that. I'll be saving it in my "important painful
lessons learned by others" mail folder.
On Oct 19, 2016 4:51 PM, "Mike Lissner"
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've had a rotten day today because of Solr. I want to share my experience
> and perhaps see if we can do something to fix
Collapse would also not work since it requires all the data to be on the
same shard.
"In order to use these features with SolrCloud, the documents must be
located on the same shard. To ensure document co-location, you can define
the router.name parameter as compositeId when creating the collection.
Do you have to group, or can you collapse instead?
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Collapse+and+Expand+Results
Cheers
Tom
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:57 PM, Jay Potharaju wrote:
> Any suggestions on how to handle result grouping in sharded index?
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:
Any suggestions on how to handle result grouping in sharded index?
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Jay Potharaju
wrote:
> Hi,
> I am working on a functionality that would require me to group documents
> by a id field. I read that the ngroups feature would not work in a sharded
> index.
> Can s
Hi Christian,
It seems to me that you can use range faceting to get counts.
Thanks,
Emir
--
Monitoring * Alerting * Anomaly Detection * Centralized Log Management
Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/
On 20.10.2015 17:05, Christian Reuschling wrote:
Hi,
we try to get the number
Sudhaker,
Not sure if this has anything to do with your problem, but I had an issue with
grouping on non-string fields (in my case it was an integer) in SolrCloud
setup (4.7). But I was using internal fields. We worked around it by defining
the field as a string instead.
-Original Messa
Not that I know of. Grouping pretty much treats all groups the same...
Best
Erick
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:14 AM, Gunnar wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to page results with grouping /field collapsing. My query is:
>
> ?q=myKeywords&start=0&rows=100&group=true&group.field=myGroupField&group.form
The field I am grouping on is a single-valued string.
It looks like in non-distributed mode if I use group=true, sort,
group.sort, and
group.limit=1, it will..
- group the results
- sort with in each group
- limit down to 1 result per group
- apply the sort between groups using the single result
What type of field are you grouping on? What happens when you distribute
it? I.e. what specifically goes wrong?
Upayavira
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013, at 09:12 PM, Bryan Bende wrote:
> I was reading this documentation on Result Grouping...
> http://docs.lucidworks.com/display/solr/Result+Grouping
>
> w
Hi Karel,
group.main=true should do the trick. When that is set to true the
group.format is always simple.
Martijn
On 27 May 2011 19:13, kare...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am using the latest nightly build of Solr 4.0 and I would like to
> use grouping/field collapsing while maintaining c
: Is it possible to use faceting to not only get the facet count but also the
: top-n documents for every facet
: directly? If not, how hard would it be to implement this as an extension?
not hard ... a custom request handler could subclass
StandardRequestHandler, call super.handleRequest, and t
On 6/4/07, Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Another way is to use two phases... the first collects the top n
documents, and the second grabs
... other members of each group in the list of docs to return.
-Yonik
On 1/5/07, Luis Neves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yonik Seeley wrote:
> There are still some things underspecified though.
>
> Let's take an example of collapseon=site, collapsenum=2
>
> The list of un-collapsed matches and their relevancy scores (sort order)
> is:
> doc=51, site=A, score=100
> d
On 1/4/07, Luis Neves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yonik Seeley wrote:
One of the reasons I like Solr so much is because I get impressive results
without having to know Lucene, which is something that will have to change
because I also need this feature.
<>
Could you explain in more detail w
Yonik Seeley wrote:
There are still some things underspecified though.
Let's take an example of collapseon=site, collapsenum=2
The list of un-collapsed matches and their relevancy scores (sort order)
is:
doc=51, site=A, score=100
doc=52, site=B, score=90
doc=53, site=C, score=80
doc=54, site
On 1/4/07, Luis Neves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yonik Seeley wrote:
> Off the top of my head, one could use a priority queue that can change
> it's size dynamically. One could increment a group count for each hit
> (like faceted search with the FieldCache) and if the group count
> exceeds "n",
Yonik Seeley wrote:
On 1/3/07, Ryan McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
thanks. Yes, the presentation layer could group results, but that is
not practical if i want to show the first 20 results out of 200,000
matches.
Nutch groups the results by site. Any idea how they do it?
Good question.
On 1/3/07, Ryan McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
thanks. Yes, the presentation layer could group results, but that is
not practical if i want to show the first 20 results out of 200,000
matches.
Nutch groups the results by site. Any idea how they do it?
Good question.
Off the top of my he
thanks. Yes, the presentation layer could group results, but that is
not practical if i want to show the first 20 results out of 200,000
matches.
Nutch groups the results by site. Any idea how they do it?
thanks
ryan
On 1/3/07, Ricardo Borillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I don't know if
Hi,
I don't know if solr can manage grouping. But you can do it using an XSLT
stylesheet:
http://www.jenitennison.com/xslt/grouping/muenchian.html
Hope it helps :)
On 1/2/07, Ryan McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is it possible to group the results from a solr query? I have indexed
the c
26 matches
Mail list logo
