This probably carried forward from a very old version organically. I
am running 7.7
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 6:25 PM Erick Erickson wrote:
>
> What version of Solr are you using? ‘cause 8x has this definition for
> _version_
>
>
>
>
> and I find no text like you’re seeing in any schema file i
What version of Solr are you using? ‘cause 8x has this definition for _version_
and I find no text like you’re seeing in any schema file in 8x….
So with a prior version, “try it and see”? See:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9449 and linked JIRAs,
the _version_ can be indexed=“fal
Yes but "the _version_ field is also a non-indexed, non-stored single
valued docValues field;" <- is that a problem?
My schema has this:
I don't know if I use the updateLog or not. How can I find out?
I think that would work for me as I could just make a dynamic fild like:
---
Yes it i
Have you seen “In-place updates”?
See:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_1/updating-parts-of-documents.html
Then use the field as part of a function query. Since it’s non-indexed, you
won’t be searching on it. That said, you can do a lot with function queries
to satisfy use-cases.
Best.
Er
Hi, Paresh.
I'm afraid the only way is to join them back in post processing
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/6_6/transforming-result-documents.html#TransformingResultDocuments-_subquery_
Although, I'm not sure it will ever work with particular collections.
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 3:42 PM Pares
It’s all a self-registration process. If you followed the instructions for
subscribing here:
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/community.html#mailing-lists-irc you should
already have an answer ;)
Best,
Erick
> On May 19, 2019, at 12:19 AM, Vadim Karagichev
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> A fellow cowork
I see, thank you very much!
> -Original Message-
> From: Mikhail Khludnev [mailto:m...@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 6:45 PM
> To: solr-user
> Subject: Re: join query and new searcher on joined collection
>
> It doesn't invalidate anything. It j
It doesn't invalidate anything. It just doesn't matches to the join query
from older collection2 see
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/b7f99fe55a6fb6e7b38828676750b3512d6899a1/solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/search/JoinQParserPlugin.java#L570
So, after commit collection2 following join
Thanx, Mikhail for reply
> collection1 has no idea about new searcher in collection2.
I suspected it. :)
So, when "join" query arrives searcher on collection1 has no chance to use
filter cache, stored before.
I suppose it invalidates filter cache, am I right?
&fq={!join score=none from=id fromI
collection1 has no idea about new searcher in collection2.
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 1:18 PM Vadim Ivanov <
vadim.iva...@spb.ntk-intourist.ru> wrote:
> Sory, I've sent unfinished message
> So, query on collection1
> q=*:*{!join score=none from=id fromIndex=collection2 to=field1}*:*
>
> The question
Sory, I've sent unfinished message
So, query on collection1
q=*:*{!join score=none from=id fromIndex=collection2 to=field1}*:*
The question is what happened with autowarming and new searchers on
collection1 when new searcher starts on collection2?
IMHO when request with join comes it's impossible
Thanks to you both. Did not take the time to look into yet. I will.
Eric.
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Original message From: Erick Erickson
Date: 2018-10-24 00:57 (GMT-05:00) To: solr-user
Subject: Re: Join across shards?
In addition to Vadim's comment,
In addition to Vadim's comment, Solr Streaming _can_
work across shards and even across collections.
Depending on your use-case this may work for you.
Best,
Erick
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:41 AM Vadim Ivanov
wrote:
>
> Hi,
> You CAN join across collections with runtime "join".
> The only limitati
Hi,
You CAN join across collections with runtime "join".
The only limitation is that FROM collection should not be sharded and joined
data should reside on one node.
Solr cannot join across nodes (distributed search is not supported).
Though using streaming expressions it's possible to do various
Please send email to solr-user-subscr...@lucene.apache.org to subscribe to
the mailing list.
Regards,
Edwin
On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 at 11:59, Karthik Gullapalli
wrote:
> Please add me to the mailing list
>
Hi,
AFAIK Solr can join only local indexes. No matter whether you join the same
collection or two different ones.
So, in your case shard1 will be joined to shard1 and shard2 to shard2.
Unfortunately it's hard to say from your data which document resides in which
shard, but you can test using &
t: Thursday, August 30, 2018 12:25 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] - Re: join works with a core, doesn't work with a
> collection
>
> Gosh, really? This is not mentioned anywhere in the documentation that I can
> find. There are node to HW consid
PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] - Re: join works with a core, doesn't work with a
collection
Gosh, really? This is not mentioned anywhere in the documentation that I can
find. There are node to HW considerations if you are joining across different
Collections.
But
30, 2018 12:11 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] - Re: join works with a core, doesn't work with a
collection
On 8/30/2018 9:49 AM, Steve Pruitt wrote:
> If you mean another running Solr server running, then no.
I mean multiple Solr processes.
The cloud example
On 8/30/2018 9:49 AM, Steve Pruitt wrote:
If you mean another running Solr server running, then no.
I mean multiple Solr processes.
The cloud example (started with bin/solr -e cloud) starts two Solr
instances if you give it the defaults. They are both running on the
same machine, but if par
If you mean another running Solr server running, then no.
-Original Message-
From: Shawn Heisey
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2018 11:31 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] - Re: join works with a core, doesn't work with a
collection
On 8/30/2018 9:17 AM,
On 8/30/2018 9:17 AM, Steve Pruitt wrote:
Single server. Localhost. I am using the simple setup and took all the
defaults.
Is there more than one Solr instance on that server? SolrCloud considers
multiple instances to be completely separate, even if they're actually
on the same hardware.
Single server. Localhost. I am using the simple setup and took all the
defaults.
-Original Message-
From: Shawn Heisey
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2018 11:14 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] - Re: join works with a core, doesn't work with a collection
On
On 8/30/2018 9:00 AM, Steve Pruitt wrote:
Is there something different I need to do for a query with a join for a
Collection? Singular Collection, not across Collections.
Initially, I used a Core for simple development. One of my queries uses a
join. It works fine.
I know very little abou
On 1/2/2018 1:27 PM, Mathieu Larose wrote:
> The following query returns p1 (which is expected):
>
> q={!join fromIndex=child from=p_id_s to=id}y_s:y1 AND z_s:z1
>
>
> The following query returns nothing (which is not expected):
>
> q=({!join fromIndex=child from=p_id_s to=id}y_s:y1 AND z_s:z1)
I
Thanks for bringing up performance perspective. Is there any bench mark on
join performance when number of shards is more than 10 where documents are
indexed based on router.field.
Are you suggesting instead of router.field go for streaming expressions or
use join with router.field and then go for
this will likely be "interesting" from a performance perspective. You
might try Streaming, especially StreamingExpressions and ParallelSQL
depending on what you need this for.
Best,
Erick
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:05 AM, Damien Kamerman wrote:
> I use a router.field so docs that I join from/to
I use a router.field so docs that I join from/to are always in the same
shard. See
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Shards+and+Indexing+Data+in+SolrCloud#ShardsandIndexingDatainSolrCloud-DocumentRouting
There is an open ticket SOLR-8297
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8
Is there any possibility of supporting joins across multiple shards in near
future ? How to achieve the join when our data is spread-ed across multiple
shards. This is very much mandatory when we need to scale out.
Any workarounds if out-of-box possibility is not there ?
Thanks,
--
View th
Perfect !
Sorry I overlooked and missed "="
Thanks,
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-not-working-in-Solr-6-5-tp4336247p4336251.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Your join should be:
{!join from=id to=C_pid_s}
On 22 May 2017 at 14:07, mganeshs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have following records / documents with Parent entity
>
> id,type_s,P_hid_s,P_name_s,P_pid_s
> 11,PERSON,11,Parent1,11
>
> And following records / documents with child en
Hi Nitin,
Probably you can look at the Streaming Expressions here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Streaming+Expressions
This is available from Solr 6.
Regards,
Edwin
On 28 February 2017 at 16:45, Nitin Kumar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can we use join query for more than 2 cores in so
Thank you for your answer but I'm not sure I've understood: document.type
is not in the same core as annotations, how can I facet on that field?
Il giorno gio 26 mag 2016 alle ore 14:06 Upayavira ha
scritto:
>
>
> On Thu, 26 May 2016, at 01:02 PM, Zaccheo Bagnati wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I have a
On Thu, 26 May 2016, at 01:02 PM, Zaccheo Bagnati wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have a SOLR core containing documents:
> document (id, type, text)
> and a core containing annotations (each document has 0 or more
> annotations):
> annotation (id, document_id, user, text)
>
> I can filter annotations on
HI Mikhail. Sorry for all the confusion
This is the original query which doesn't work
q=PersonName:peter AND {!type=join from=DocPersonID to=PersonID
fromIndex=document v='(*:* -DocType:pdf)' }
I figure out that negating outside the cross join query makes the trick
for me.
I take the negation ou
Sergo,
Please provide more debug output, I want to see how query was parsed.
On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Sergio García Maroto
wrote:
> My debugQuery=true returns related to the NOT:
>
> 0.06755901 = (MATCH) sum of: 0.06755901 = (MATCH) MatchAllDocsQuery,
> product of: 0.06755901 = queryNor
Actually I was wrong this doesn't work. (-DocType:pdf)
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/join-and-NOT-together-tp4257411p4257620.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
My debugQuery=true returns related to the NOT:
0.06755901 = (MATCH) sum of: 0.06755901 = (MATCH) MatchAllDocsQuery,
product of: 0.06755901 = queryNorm
I tried changing v='(*:* -DocType:pdf)' to v='(-DocType:pdf)'
and it worked.
Anyone could explain the difference?
Thanks
Sergo
On 15 February
Hello Sergio,
What debougQuery=true output does look like?
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 7:10 PM, marotosg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to solve an issue when doing a search joining two collections
> and negating the cross core query.
>
> Let's say I have one collection person and another collection
Hello Troy,
What a challenge!!
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Troy Edwards
wrote:
>
> 2) It appears that I cannot have fromIndex=Contracts because it is very
> large and has to be sharded. Per my understanding SolrCloud join does not
> support multiple shards
>
.. but it doesn't mean it will
I had missed a field in ContractItem index (ClientId)
*ContractItem*
ContractItemId - string
ItemId - string
ClientId - string
ContractCode - string (facet and filter on this)
Priority - integer (order by priority descending)
Active - boolean (filter on this)
2) It appears that I cannot have fr
1. i'd say it's challenge.
2. can't you do the opposite filter active contracts, join them back to
items, and facet then?
q=(Description:colgate OR Categories:colgate OR
Sellers:colgate)&fq={!join from=ItemId to=ItemId
fromIndex=Contracts)Active:true&facet.field=SellersString
3. note: there is {!te
On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Vineeth Dasaraju
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I had indexed a nested json object into solr as a parent document with
> child documents. Whenever I query for a term in the child document, I am
> returned only the child documents. Is it possible to get the parent
> document alo
available to the general
> public. Is there any URL where they post their nightly build?
>
> Thanks in advance
> Rajesh Panneerselvam
>
> From: Mikhail Khludnev [via Lucene] [mailto:
> ml-node+s472066n4174700...@n3.nabble.com]
> Sent: 17-Dec-14 15:05
> To: Rajesh Panneers
On 12/31/2014 12:19 AM, Rajesh wrote:
> Is there a way to get the trunk and I can update the same patch to check this
> functionality. If so, where can I get the trunk build?
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToContribute#Getting_the_source_code
You will need a number of software components, includi
Rajesh,
it seems you need the trunk to apply patch on. my favorite way to do this
is
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/
Have a good hack!
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Rajesh wrote:
> Is there a way to get the trunk and I can update the same patch to check
> this
> functionality. If so,
Is there a way to get the trunk and I can update the same patch to check this
functionality. If so, where can I get the trunk build?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-in-SOLR-tp4173930p4176678.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.c
On 12/30/2014 11:44 PM, Rajesh wrote:
> Oh! Thanks Mikhail. But I could see a comment in that JIRA, above your
> comment which is from Thomas champagne that the patch was committed to
> current trunk. Is it not for this issue Mikhail?
The message from Thomas Champagne indicates that he updated t
+s472066n4176668...@n3.nabble.com]
Sent: 31-Dec-14 11:52
To: Rajesh Panneerselvam
Subject: Re: Join in SOLR
Rajesh,
Nohow. Jira is still open, the patch wasn't committed anywhere.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Rajesh <[hidden
email]>
wrote:
> Mikhail,
>
> How can I get a nightly bui
e general
> public. Is there any URL where they post their nightly build?
>
> Thanks in advance
> Rajesh Panneerselvam
>
> From: Mikhail Khludnev [via Lucene] [mailto:
> ml-node+s472066n4174700...@n3.nabble.com]
> Sent: 17-Dec-14 15:05
> To: Rajesh Panneerselvam
> Subject
ucene]
[mailto:ml-node+s472066n4174700...@n3.nabble.com]
Sent: 17-Dec-14 15:05
To: Rajesh Panneerselvam
Subject: Re: Join in SOLR
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Rajesh Panneerselvam <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Yes Mikhail. This is what I want exactly. My sub-entities should be
> add
ime soon?
>
Rajesh, it's a question to committers, you can leave a comment and/or vote
for an issue.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Rajesh Panneerselvam
>
>
>
> *From:* Mikhail Khludnev [mailto:mkhlud...@griddynamics.com]
> *Sent:* 17-Dec-14 12:43
> *To:* Rajesh Pa
Thanks Mikhail. As per what you have mentioned can I get a list of sub
entities with this new Zipper join. Because in existing DIH I'm getting a
list for individual fields of the sub entities.
And also, I've not found DIH 5 jar anywhere. Is it still in development.
--
View this message in con
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> Using a database view that does the JOIN on the server side is pretty
> much guaranteed to have far better performance. Database software is
> very good at doing joins efficiently when proper DB indexes are
> available ... the dataimport han
On 12/12/2014 5:16 AM, Tomoko Uchida wrote:
> I cannot find out your table structure and Solr schema,
> but if your requirement is too complex to handle by DIH, you could handle
> it by rich database functionality.
>
> I think creating a database view is good choice...
>
> (Of course, other exper
I cannot find out your table structure and Solr schema,
but if your requirement is too complex to handle by DIH, you could handle
it by rich database functionality.
I think creating a database view is good choice...
(Of course, other experts may have ideas using DIH?)
2014-12-12 20:43 GMT+09:0
Yes. two entities are child for the first one. I've gone through the link.
But what I can get out of the configuration given in that link is, I could
get an array for all the individual fields defined in the sub-entities.
For. e.g if my sub-entity has 3 fields name, id, desc. I'm getting a list
for
Thank you for config information.
Three tables have relation (by foreign key) ?
You might want to have one nested tag in rather than 3
one in .
By using nested tag, you may able to merge tables *before*
importing them to Solr. All works done by SQL.
You have already seen this wiki? If not, ex
Thanks for your reply Tomoko. My data-config file looks like the below.
Each entity represents a table in DB. Now, If I want to join these three
tables, can I make use of the SOLR join functionality..
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-in-SOLR-
Hi,
I cannot guess what is 'entities' in your context, but do you want some
kind of join functionality like RDBs on Solr?
Basically, Solr is not "relational". So at first, you should consider
denormalize your RDB tables to one table/view (or issue SQL JOIN query in
DIH) to import data to Solr.
If
https://wiki.apache.org/solr/Join
did you check it?
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 4:52 PM, abhayd wrote:
> hi All,
> I am solr schema like
>
> id | task
> 1|t1
> 1|t2
> 2|t2
> 2|t3
>
> I would like to get all the id's where task t2 & t1 are associated with
> same
> id. Is there anyway we can do inner
I have figured it out.
The reason is simply the type of join in Solr. It is an outer join. Since
both filter queries are executed separately, a house that has available
documents with discount > 1 or (sd_year:2014 AND sd_month:11) will be
returned even though my intention was applying bother cond
Please read:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
and the contained link:
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:03 AM, Kamal Kishore
wrote:
> NO reply from anybody..seems strange ?
>
>
> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Kamal Kishore
> wrote:
>
>> Any
There are two previous threads in the list that i think can help you,
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/201405.mbox/%3c1398929537117-4134045.p...@n3.nabble.com%3E
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/201404.mbox/%3c20140403114242.horde.epx2xawezs3mvmt
You really have to provide more detail here.
bq: Moreover, solr is not allowing to get data from both the core.
What do you mean? the second core is unavailable? Solr joins
do not return data from the "from" table. I really suggest you
try denormalizing the data first, don't try to use Solr like
Probably because we answered a nearly identical request yesterday. It had items
in one core and counts in a different. Please read all the responses to this
e-mail.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/201405.mbox/browser
Specifically, these responses:
http://mail-archives
Any updates guys ?
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Kamal Kishore
wrote:
> Dear Team,
>
> I have two solr cores. One containing products information and second has
> customers points. I am looking at solr join to query on first product core
> & boost the results based on customer points in second
NO reply from anybody..seems strange ?
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Kamal Kishore
wrote:
> Any updates guys ?
>
>
> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Kamal Kishore > wrote:
>
>> Dear Team,
>>
>> I have two solr cores. One containing products information and second has
>> customers points. I am
Thanks reply !
I use Solr to name products for storing search information, and core
categories I use for reference, because it CATEGORY_NAME fields.
to use the sort asc | desc.
If so, the field CATEGORY_NAME on products later CATEGORY_NAME I edit. with
10 million rows is very dangerous.
-
First of all here are the something that might help others to understand
your problem.
- what is your current logic
- what you are trying to achieve?
- what problem you are facing in achieving the results?
- mail's subject
I am not familiar that we can do sort by query of the results
Thanks Kranti Parisa !
I have 2 core :
products(id, product_name, category_id );
categories(category_id, category_name);
query similar SQL:
SELECT p.* from Products AS p
Inner join Categories AS c
ON p.category_id = c.category_id
Order by c.category_name asc;
Purpose sorting by category_name,
Can you describe what is your business requirement (how'z your data
indexed, what is the request and what should be the response). and give us
some examples.
If you want to sort the results of the first core based on the sorting
preference of the second core that you are joining with, that doesn't
Pls! Help me.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-solr-tp4132615p4132830.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
http://localhost:8081/solr/products/select?q={!join+from=category_id+to=category_id
fromIndex=categories v=$vk}*:*&vk=(sort= category_name+desc)
products( id, name, category_id);
categories( category_id, category_name)
order by desc|asc category_name
--
View this message in context:
http:/
Sorry, it is not clear what the issue actually is, what you tried to
do to solve it and where specifically you are stuck.
Please review http://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists , it will
help you to ask a better question and get a better answer. Start from
better subject once you reviewed the
Pls, Help me !
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Join-solr-tp4132615p4132625.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
Please, check using
...q={!join+to=cat_id+from=id+fromIndex=category}name:*...
Regards.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 3:37 AM, hungctk33 wrote:
> Hi . all. I has table
> Product (id, name, cat_id)
> Category (id, name);
>
> Select pro.id, pro.name, cat.name from Product as pro inner join Catego
> embedded nested query parsers . That's a fairly new feature compared
> to
> > > > non-embedded nested query parsers - maybe Yonik could shed some
> light.
> > > This
> > > > may date from when he made a copy of the Lucene query parser for Solr
> &g
is
> > > may date from when he made a copy of the Lucene query parser for Solr
> and
> > > added the parsing of embedded nested query parsers to the grammar. It
> > seems
> > > like the embedded nested query parser is only being applied to a
> single,
> > > whit
grammar. It
> seems
> > like the embedded nested query parser is only being applied to a single,
> > white space-delimited term, and not respecting the fact that the term is
> a
> > quoted phrase.
> >
> > -- Jack Krupansky
> >
> > -Original Message--
;
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> -Original Message- From: Marcin Rzewucki
> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 5:19 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: join and filter query with AND
>
>
> Nope. There is no line break in the string and it is not feed from
arcin Rzewucki
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 5:19 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: join and filter query with AND
Nope. There is no line break in the string and it is not feed from file.
What else could be the reason ?
On 19 March 2014 17:57, Erick Erickson wrote:
It looks
You may try this
(({!join from=inner_id to=outer_id fromIndex=othercore v=$joinQuery}
And pass another parameter joinQuery=(city:"Stara Zagora" AND prod:214)
Thanks,
Kranti K. Parisa
http://www.linkedin.com/in/krantiparisa
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 4:47 AM, Marcin Rzewucki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Eri
Hi,
Erick, I do not get your point. What kind of servlet container settings do
you mean and why do you think they might be related ? I'm using Jetty and
never set any limit for packet size. My query does not work only in case of
double quotes and space between words. Why? It works in other cases a
Well, the error message really looks like your input is
getting chopped off.
It's vaguely possible that you have some super-low limit
in your servlet container configuration that is only letting very
small packets through.
What I'd do is look in the Solr log file to see exactly what
is coming thr
Nope. There is no line break in the string and it is not feed from file.
What else could be the reason ?
On 19 March 2014 17:57, Erick Erickson wrote:
> It looks to me like you're feeding this from some
> kind of text file and you really _do_ have a
> line break after "Stara
>
> Or have a line
It looks to me like you're feeding this from some
kind of text file and you really _do_ have a
line break after "Stara
Or have a line break in the string you paste into the URL
or something similar.
Kind of shooting in the dark though.
Erick
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Marcin Rzewucki wro
Thanks Mike, that surely helps to clarify the difference.
On the related note, if we have provide a scoring support for solr
join, instead of using lucene join, what would be best way to do that .
There's one suggestion that david gave below :- build a custom QParser
and call Lucene's JOIN (J
I suspect (not certain) one reason for the performance difference with
Solr vs Lucene joins is that Solr operates on a top-level reader?
This results in fast joins, but it means whenever you open a new
reader (NRT reader) there is a high cost to regenerate the top-level
data structures.
But if th
Re-posting...
Thanks,
Anand
On 2/12/2014 10:55 AM, anand chandak wrote:
Thanks David, really helpful response.
You mentioned that if we have to add scoring support in solr then a
possible approach would be to add a custom QueryParser, which might be
taking Lucene's JOIN module. I have t
Thanks David, really helpful response.
You mentioned that if we have to add scoring support in solr then a
possible approach would be to add a custom QueryParser, which might be
taking Lucene's JOIN module.
Curious, if it is possible instead to enhance existing solr's
JoinQParserPlugin and
Hi Anand.
Solr's JOIN query, {!join}, constant-scores. It's simpler and faster and
more memory efficient (particularly the worse-case memory use) to implement
the JOIN query without scoring, so that's why. Of course, you might want it
to score and pay whatever penalty is involved. For that you'
Resending, if somebody can please respond.
Thanks,
Anand
On 2/5/2014 6:26 PM, anand chandak wrote:
Hi,
Having a question on join score, why doesn't the solr join query return
the scores. Looking at the code, I see there's JoinScorer defined in
the JoinQParserPlugin class ? If its not used
If it helps to clarify any, here's the full query:
/select
?
q=*:*
&
fq=type:ProjectGroup
&
fq={!join from=project_id_i to=project_id_im}user_id_i:65615 -role_id_i:18
type:UserRole
We have two Solr servers that were indexed from the same database. One of
the servers is running Solr 4.2, while th
Worked :D
Thanks a lot!
2013/7/10 Marcelo Elias Del Valle
> root_id is a dynamic field... But should the type of the field change
> according to the values? Because using the same configuration but using
> "room1" as value, it works.
>
> Let me compare the configurations:
>
>
root_id is a dynamic field... But should the type of the field change
according to the values? Because using the same configuration but using
"room1" as value, it works.
Let me compare the configurations:
Indeed, one is text_general and the other is string... I will try to create
a fixed fiel
What kind of field is root_id? If it's tokenized or not the
same type as id, that could account for it.
Best
Erick
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Marcelo Elias Del Valle
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to create a POC to test query joins. However, I was
> surprised when I saw my test worked
Oops... I misread and confused your "q" and "fq" params.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Jack Krupansky
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 7:47 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: join not working with UUIDs
Your join is requesting to use the &q
Your join is requesting to use the "join_id" field ("from") of documents
matching the query of "cor_parede:branca", but the join_id field of that
document is empty.
Maybe you intended to search in the other direction, like
"acessorio1:Teclado".
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 5:49 AM, Marcin Rzewucki wrote:
> I meant I get fields from parent core only. Is it possible to get fields
> from both cores using join query?
Not yet. Joins are currently only for filtering.
-Yonik
http://lucidworks.com
1 - 100 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
