uot; (e.g. a special user ID used for this purpose).
Anyway, something to look at.
-Original Message-
From: Jack Krupansky [mailto:jack.krupan...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 10:39 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; Brian Usrey
Subject: Re: SOLR searching
Are there at lea
Are there at least a small number of categories of users with discrete
prices, or can each user have their own price. The former is doable, the
latter is not unless the number of users is relatively small, in which case
they are equivalent to categories.
You could have a set of dynamic fields, pri
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 08:17 +0100, Sathya wrote:
> I am running single instance solr and the JVM heap space is minimum 6.3gb
> and maximum 24.31gb. Nothing is running to complete the 24gb except tomcat
> server. I have only 2 copyField entries only.
Your Xmx is the same size as your RAM. It shoul
Hi Shawn,
I am running single instance solr and the JVM heap space is minimum 6.3gb
and maximum 24.31gb. Nothing is running to complete the 24gb except tomcat
server. I have only 2 copyField entries only.
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Shawn Heisey-4 [via Lucene] <
ml-node+s472066n4115455...@
On 2/4/2014 9:49 PM, Sathya wrote:
> Yes all the instances are reading the same 8GB data at a time. The java
> search programs(> 15 instances) are running in different machines, different
> JVM and they accessing the solr server machine(Ubuntu 64 bit). And the solr
> Index is not shard. The query r
Hi,
Yes all the instances are reading the same 8GB data at a time. The java
search programs(> 15 instances) are running in different machines, different
JVM and they accessing the solr server machine(Ubuntu 64 bit). And the solr
Index is not shard. The query rates are too poor(more than 5 seconds
You also said you have multiple instances (> 15) but are they all reading
the same 8Gb data (in which case it must be static or you'd get locking
problems) or is it partitioned/sharded somehow? I'd have the same
questions as the others, query rates, how are your queries distributed over
the instan
Maybe you need a larger Java heap.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Sathya
Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2014 6:11 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Solr Searching Issue
Hi Friends,
I am working in Solr 4.6.0 from last 2 months. i have indexed the data in
solr. Index
Hi;
Which JVM parameters do you use?
Thanks;
Furkan KAMACI
2014-02-04 Sathya :
> Hi Furkan,
>
> I have index the subjects that containing only 1 to 10 words per subject.
> And query rate is minimum 7 seconds for one searching. And i have single
> solr instance only.
>
>
>
> --
> View this mess
Hi Furkan,
I have index the subjects that containing only 1 to 10 words per subject.
And query rate is minimum 7 seconds for one searching. And i have single
solr instance only.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Searching-Issue-tp4115207p4115234.html
Sent
Hi;
Your index size is not much for a 24 GB machine. There should be any other
problem for it. What is your document size and query rate per second? On
the other hand how do you start up your Solr instance (which parameters do
you use)?
Thanks;
Furkan KAMACI
2014-02-04 Sathya :
> Hi Friends,
>
Hi-
Unit tests to the rescue! The current unit test system in the 4.x branch
catches code sequence problems.
[junit4]> Throwable #1: java.lang.IllegalStateException:
TokenStream contract violation: reset()/close() call missing, reset()
called multiple times, or subclass does not call super.
Solr is very flexible and you can configure it in lots of amazing ways. You
need to start with carefully specifying the rules that you wish to
implement. Is the numeric the boundary, or do you want to support arbitrary
prefixes, or... what? Be specific, because that determines what features of
> how it is possible also explain me and which tokenizer
> class can support for
> finding the special characters .
Probably WhiteSpaceTokenizer will do the job for you. Plus you need to escape
special characters (if you are using defType=lucene query parser).
Anyhow you need to provide us mor
thanks for giving replay
how it is possible also explain me and which tokenizer class can support for
finding the special characters .
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-searching-for-special-characters-tp3388974p3392157.html
Sent from the Solr - User maili
Yes.
> -Original Message-
> From: vighnesh [mailto:svighnesh...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 2:22 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: solr searching for special characters?
>
> Hi all,
>
> I need to search special characters in solr . so
> Is it possible to sea
yes reindexing is necessary for protwords,synanym update
-
Grijesh
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-searching-harri-finds-harry-tp1438486p1438802.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Yes to restart, no to re-index. Was hoping that wouldn't be necessary.
I'll do that now.
On 08/09/10 11:48, Grijesh.singh wrote:
>
> have u restart the solr after adding words in protwords and reindex the data?
>
> -
> Grijesh
-BEGIN PGP SIG
have u restart the solr after adding words in protwords and reindex the data?
-
Grijesh
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-searching-harri-finds-harry-tp1438486p1438735.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have "harry" as a protected word in protword.txt
Here is the xml definition for my text column
On 08/09/10 1
U have not provided much detail about analysis of that field,but I am sure
that problem because of stemming
u can see by analysis page or by debugQuery=on parameter.
To prevent stemming u have to put words in protword.txt on which u do not
need any stemming
-
Grijesh
--
View this message in
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Peter Spam wrote:
> This is a very small number of documents (7000), so I am surprised Solr is
> having such a hard time with it!!
>
> I do facet on 3 terms.
>
> Subsequent "hello" searches are faster, but still well over a second. This
> is a very fast Mac Pro,
How much disk space is used by the index?
If you run the Lucene CheckIndex program, how many terms etc. does it report?
When you do the first facet query, how much does the memory in use grow?
Are you storing the text fields, or only indexing? Do you fetch the
facets only, or do you also fetch t
This is a very small number of documents (7000), so I am surprised Solr is
having such a hard time with it!!
I do facet on 3 terms.
Subsequent "hello" searches are faster, but still well over a second. This is
a very fast Mac Pro, with 6GB of RAM.
Thanks,
Peter
On Aug 25, 2010, at 9:52 AM,
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Peter Spam wrote:
> So, I went through all the effort to break my documents into max 1 MB chunks,
> and searching for hello still takes over 40 seconds (searching across 7433
> documents):
>
> 8 results (41980 ms)
>
> What is going on??? (scroll down for
he matter, i think it should (made) to be possible to
> return multiple rows in an ArrayList.
>
> -Original message-
> From: Peter Spam
> Sent: Tue 17-08-2010 00:47
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org;
> Subject: Re: Solr searching performance issues, using large docu
to
return multiple rows in an ArrayList.
-Original message-
From: Peter Spam
Sent: Tue 17-08-2010 00:47
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org;
Subject: Re: Solr searching performance issues, using large documents
Still stuck on this - any hints on how to write the JavaScript to split
Still stuck on this - any hints on how to write the JavaScript to split a
document? Thanks!
-Pete
On Aug 5, 2010, at 8:10 PM, Lance Norskog wrote:
> You may have to write your own javascript to read in the giant field
> and split it up.
>
> On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Peter Spam wrote:
You may have to write your own javascript to read in the giant field
and split it up.
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Peter Spam wrote:
> I've read through the DataImportHandler page a few times, and still can't
> figure out how to separate a large document into smaller documents. Any
> hints?
I've read through the DataImportHandler page a few times, and still can't
figure out how to separate a large document into smaller documents. Any hints?
:-) Thanks!
-Peter
On Aug 2, 2010, at 9:01 PM, Lance Norskog wrote:
> Spanning won't work- you would have to make overlapping mini-document
Spanning won't work- you would have to make overlapping mini-documents
if you want to support this.
I don't know how big the chunks should be- you'll have to experiment.
Lance
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Peter Spam wrote:
> What would happen if the search query phrase spanned separate docu
What would happen if the search query phrase spanned separate document chunks?
Also, what would the optimal size of chunks be?
Thanks!
-Peter
On Aug 1, 2010, at 7:21 PM, Lance Norskog wrote:
> Not that I know of.
>
> The DataImportHandler has the ability to create multiple documents
> from o
Not that I know of.
The DataImportHandler has the ability to create multiple documents
from one input stream. It is possible to create a DIH file that reads
large log files and splits each one into N documents, with the file
name as a common field. The DIH wiki page tells you in general how to
mak
Thanks for the pointer, Lance! Is there an example of this somewhere?
-Peter
On Jul 31, 2010, at 3:13 PM, Lance Norskog wrote:
> Ah! You're not just highlighting, you're snippetizing. This makes it easier.
>
> Highlighting does not stream- it pulls the entire stored contents into
> one string
Ah! You're not just highlighting, you're snippetizing. This makes it easier.
Highlighting does not stream- it pulls the entire stored contents into
one string and then pulls out the snippet. If you want this to be
fast, you have to split up the text into small pieces and only
snippetize from the
However, I do need to search the entire document, or else the highlighting will
sometimes be blank :-(
Thanks!
- Peter
ps. sorry for the many responses - I'm rushing around trying to get this
working.
On Jul 31, 2010, at 1:11 PM, Peter Spam wrote:
> Correction - it went from 17 seconds to 10
Correction - it went from 17 seconds to 10 seconds - I was changing the
hl.regex.maxAnalyzedChars the first time.
Thanks!
-Peter
On Jul 31, 2010, at 1:06 PM, Peter Spam wrote:
> On Jul 30, 2010, at 1:16 PM, Peter Karich wrote:
>
>> did you already try other values for hl.maxAnalyzedChars=21474
On Jul 30, 2010, at 1:16 PM, Peter Karich wrote:
> did you already try other values for hl.maxAnalyzedChars=2147483647
Yes, I tried dropping it down to 21, but it didn't have much of an impact (one
search I just tried went from 17 seconds to 15.8 seconds, and this is an 8-core
Mac Pro with 6GB
On Jul 30, 2010, at 7:04 PM, Lance Norskog wrote:
> Wait- how much text are you highlighting? You say these logfiles are X
> big- how big are the actual documents you are storing?
I want it to be like google - I put the entire (sometimes 60MB) doc in a field,
and then just highlight 2-4 lines of
Wait- how much text are you highlighting? You say these logfiles are X
big- how big are the actual documents you are storing?
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Peter Karich wrote:
> Hi Peter :-),
>
> did you already try other values for
>
> hl.maxAnalyzedChars=2147483647
>
> ? Also regular expre
Hi Peter :-),
did you already try other values for
hl.maxAnalyzedChars=2147483647
? Also regular expression highlighting is more expensive, I think.
What does the 'fuzzy' variable mean? If you use this to query via
"~someTerm" instead "someTerm"
then you should try the trunk of solr which is a l
I do store term vector:
-Pete
On Jul 30, 2010, at 7:30 AM, Li Li wrote:
> hightlight's time is mainly spent on getting the field which you want
> to highlight and tokenize this field(If you don't store term vector) .
> you can check what's wrong,
>
> 2010/7/30 Peter Spam :
>> If I don't do hi
hightlight's time is mainly spent on getting the field which you want
to highlight and tokenize this field(If you don't store term vector) .
you can check what's wrong,
2010/7/30 Peter Spam :
> If I don't do highlighting, it's really fast. Optimize has no effect.
>
> -Peter
>
> On Jul 29, 2010, a
If I don't do highlighting, it's really fast. Optimize has no effect.
-Peter
On Jul 29, 2010, at 11:54 AM, dc tech wrote:
> Are you storing the entire log file text in SOLR? That's almost 3gb of
> text that you are storing in the SOLR. Try to
> 1) Is this first time performance or on repaat que
Are you storing the entire log file text in SOLR? That's almost 3gb of
text that you are storing in the SOLR. Try to
1) Is this first time performance or on repaat queries with the same fields?
2) Optimze the index and test performance again
3) index without storing the text and see what the perfor
Any ideas? I've got 5000 documents with an average size of 850k each, and it
sometimes takes 2 minutes for a query to come back when highlighting is turned
on! Help!
-Pete
On Jul 21, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Peter Spam wrote:
> From the mailing list archive, Koji wrote:
>
>> 1. Provide another fi
>From the mailing list archive, Koji wrote:
> 1. Provide another field for highlighting and use copyField to copy plainText
> to the highlighting field.
and Lance wrote:
http://www.mail-archive.com/solr-user@lucene.apache.org/msg35548.html
> If you want to highlight field X, doing the
> termO
On Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:50:58 -0300
"Jorge Solari" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> in the schema file.
or use Dismax query handler.
b
_
{Beto|Norberto|Numard} Meijome
Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you
I didn't mean with that it was the way to define the default
field it in the schema, only a generic way to say "default field name".
The default field name, seems to be "text" in your case.
If the search query doesn't say on which field to search, the word will be
searched in that field.
in the
Never mind,
I understand now.
I have text.
I was searching on a string field with space in it and with no quotes.
This is causing to scan for text fields(since default search field is text)
in the schema.
Also in my schema there is an indexed field(AnimalNameText) which is not
populated whi
Hmm,
I dont have any defined in the schema.xml.
Can you give the exact syntax how it looks like in schema.xml
I have text.
Does it mean if sufficient requested count not available, it looks for the
search string in any of the text fields that are indexed?
Thanks
Ravi
Jorge Solari wrote:
>
Your query
AnimalName:German Shepard.
means
AnimalName:German :Shepard.
whichever the defaultField is
Try with
AnimalName:"German Shepard"
or
AnimalName:German AND AnimalName:Shepard.
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Yerraguntla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a data set w
thanks ! I think I fixed the issue and it's doing good :)
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Solr searching issue..
> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:12:00 +
>
> Copy field dest="text&q
ROTECTED]> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org> Subject: RE: Solr
> searching issue..> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:34:47 +0100> > > again whatever
> I have pasted it didn't work ! .. I have attached the schema.xml file
> instead
again whatever I have pasted it didn't work ! .. I have attached the schema.xml
file instead,,, sorry for spamming you all
thanks
ak
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Solr searching issue..
>
with some strange reason my copy and paste didn't work !!! sorry to terrible
you all.. hope you can see them now..
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Solr searching issue..
> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 20
r-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Solr searching issue..
>
> You can use EdgeNGramTokenizer available with Solr 1.3 to achieve this. But
> I'd think again about introducing this kind of search as n-grams can bloat
> your index size.
>
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3
thanks,,
I will give it a try and get back to you
> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 20:14:11 +0530
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Solr searching issue..
>
> You can use EdgeNGramTokenizer availabl
What was the type of the field that you are using. I guess you could achieve it
by a simple swap of text and string.
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org> Subject: Solr
> searching issue..> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:28:50 +0100> > > Hi solr-users,
> > > version type: nigh
You can use EdgeNGramTokenizer available with Solr 1.3 to achieve this. But
I'd think again about introducing this kind of search as n-grams can bloat
your index size.
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 3:58 PM, dudes dudes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi solr-users,
>
> version type: nightly build solr-2
60 matches
Mail list logo
