Have you attached JVisualVM or a similar tool for sampling when Solr is
answering the requests with highlight? What relevant methods are coming up?
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 11:26 AM, sasarun wrote:
> Hi Amrit,
>
> Thanks for the response. I did went through both and that is how I landed
> up
> wit
Hi Amrit,
Thanks for the response. I did went through both and that is how I landed up
with unified method for highlighter
Thanks,
Arun
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Highlighting-Performance-improvement-suggestions-required-Solr-6-5-1-tp4349767p4349781.h
Pardon I didn't go through details in configs and I guess you have already
went through the recent talks on highlighters, still sharing if not:
https://www.slideshare.net/lucidworks/solr-highlighting-at-full-speed-presented-by-timothy-rodriguez-bloomberg-david-smiley-d-w-smiley-llc
https://www.you
arch performance for these kind of files or even files having large file
size ?
Thanks
Shyam
-Original Message-
From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2011 8:57 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: highlighting performance poor
Highlighting is dependent on the size of the
data being fed through the highlighter. Unless you have
termVectors & offsets & positions enabled, the text
must be re-analyzed, see:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FieldOptionsByUseCase?highlight=%28termvector%29%7C%28retrieve%29%7C%28contents%29
But high
To search in a field, it has to be indexed. You can store a field
without indexing if you want to highlight it. If you index it with the
term* options, it should highlight faster. Since these do not speed up
higlighting, your analysis stack is probably very simple. The term*
options are variations
Hi,
Sorry for the second e-mail, but for the duplication problem, I have done
something wrong, ok now it works, and the query time reduced to 0.1 seconds
which is perfect. However, still if I use
term* directives, it gives the same error, so either I will index short_text
field as well o
Hi,
Thanks. However as I said before, termOffsets/termPositions/termVectors had
very little effect on the performance and I don't know why. I have done
exactly what you are saying but highlighting 10 documents that have 200-400
A4 pages still takes around 2 seconds, depending on the query. I will
If you want to highlight field X, doing the
termOffsets/termPositions/termVectors will make highlighting that
field faster. You should make a separate field and apply these options
to that field.
Now: doing a copyfield adds a "value" to a multiValued field. For a
text field, you get a multi-valued
Hi,
Thanks a lot for the replies, I could have chance today to test them.
First of all termVectors/termPositions/termOffsets did not help, it has very
little effect, but I tried a workaroud, however it is not as efficient as I
thought.
>From these fields;
I
Do you have these options turned on when you index the text field:
termVectors/termPositions/termOffsets ?
Highlighting needs the information created by these anlysis options.
If they are not turned on, Solr has load the document text and run the
analyzer again with these options on, uses that dat
(10/05/05 22:08), Serdar Sahin wrote:
Hi,
Currently, there are similar topics active in the mailing list, but it I did
not want to steal the topic.
I have currently indexed 100.000 documents, they are microsoft office/pdf
etc documents I convert them to TXT files before indexing. Files are betw
termine
which best suits are needs.
Jake
-Original Message-
From: Mark Miller [mailto:markrmil...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 11:23 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Cc: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Highlighting performance between 1.3 and 1.4rc
The 1.4 highl
-user@lucene.apache.org
Cc: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Highlighting performance between 1.3 and 1.4rc
The 1.4 highlighter is Now slower if you have multi term queries or
phrase queries. You can get the old behavior (which is faster) if you
pass usePhraseHighlighter=false - but you
The 1.4 highlighter is Now slower if you have multi term queries or
phrase queries. You can get the old behavior (which is faster) if you
pass usePhraseHighlighter=false - but you will not get correct phrase
highlighting and multi term queries won't highlight - eg prefix/
wildcard/range.
-
Just an FYI, Lucene 2.9 has FastVectorHighlighter:
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/all/org/apache/lucene/search/vectorhighlight/package-summary.html
Features
* fast for large docs
* support N-gram fields
* support phrase-unit highlighting with slops
*
Hey Matt:
I have been facing the same issue. I have a text field that I
highlight along with other fields (may be 10 others fields). But If I enable
highlighting on this text field that contains large number of
characters/words ( > 100 000 characters) , highlighting suffers performanc
Thanks Otis. I added termVector="true" for those fields, but there isn't a
noticeable difference. So, just to be a little more clear, the dynamic
fields I'm adding... there might be hundreds. Do you see this as a problem?
Thanks,
Matt
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Otis Gospodnetic <
otis_gospo
Matt,
I believe indexing those fields that you will use for highlighting with term
vectors enabled will make things faster (and your index a bit bigger).
Otis --
Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch
- Original Message
> From: Matt Mitchell
> To: solr-user@luce
19 matches
Mail list logo
