Hi,
Is the uniqueKey in schema.xml really required?
Reason is, I am indexing two tables and I have id as unique key in
schema.xml but id field is not there in one of the tables and indexing
fails. Do I really require this unique field for Solr to index it better
or can I do away with this?
Ok got it.
I am indexing two tables differently. I am using Solrj to index with
@Field annotation. I make two queries initially and fetch the data from
two tables and index them separately. But what if the ids in two tables
are same? That means documents with same id will be deleted when doing
upd
Hi Nobble,
Thank you very much
That removed the error while server startup.
But I don't think the data is getting indexed upon running the dataimport. I
am unable to display the date field values on searching.
This is my complete configs:
Ok, but how do you map your table structure to the index? As far as I can
understand, the two tables have different structre, so why/how do you map
two different datastructures onto a single index? Are the two tables
connected in some way? If so, you could make your index structure reflect
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:26:02 +0100
"Aleksander M. Stensby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, then I suggest you index the field in two different ways if you want
> both possible ways of searching. One, where you treat the entire name as
> one token (in lowercase) (then you can search for aver
Yes it is. You need a unique id because the add method works as and "add
or update" method. When adding a document whose ID is already found in the
index, the old document will be deleted and the new will be added. Are you
indexing two tables into the same index? Or does one entry in the inde
Hello,
I have a CSV file with 6M records which took 22min to index with
solr 1.2. I then stopped tomcat replaced the solr stuff inside
webapps with version 1.3, wiped my index and restarted tomcat.
Indexing the exact same content now takes 69min. My machine has
2GB of RAM and tomcat is running
Technically, no, a uniqueKey field is NOT required. I've yet to run
into a situation where it made sense not to use one though.
As for indexing database tables - if one of your tables doesn't have a
primary key, does it have an aggregate unique "key" of some sort? Do
you plan on updating
I am not indexing to same index. I have two methods which adds doc by
calling server.addBeans(list) twice. (2 different lists obtained from
DB).
Now I call server.query("some query1") and obtain result. Then from this
I create query based on first result and call server.query("some
query2");
--
Hi everyone,
I'm currently working with the nightly build of Solr (solr-2008-11-17)
and trying to figure out how to transform a row-object with Javascript
to include multiple values (in a single multivalued field). When I try
something like this as a transformer:
function splitTerms(row) {
Hello,
I would like some details on the autocommit mechanism. I tried to search
the wiki, but found only the
standard maxDoc/time settings.
i have set the autocommit parameters in solrconfig.xml to 8000 docs and
30milis.
Indexing at around 200 docs per second (from multiple processes, usi
Interesting...could go along with the earlier guys post about slow
indexing...
Nickolai Toupikov wrote:
Hello,
I would like some details on the autocommit mechanism. I tried to
search the wiki, but found only the
standard maxDoc/time settings.
i have set the autocommit parameters in solrconfi
Could also go with the thread safety issues with pending and the
deadlock that was reported the other day. All could pretty easily be
related. Do we have a JIRA issue on it yet? Suppose I'll look...
Mark Miller wrote:
Interesting...could go along with the earlier guys post about slow
indexing.
Could trigger the commit in this case?
-Original Message-
From: Nickolai Toupikov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 8:36 Joe
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Question about autocommit
Hello,
I would like some details on the autocommit mechanism. I tr
They are separate commits. ramBufferSizeMB controls when the underlying
Lucene IndexWriter flushes ram to disk (this isnt like the IndexWriter
commiting or closing). The solr autocommit controls when solr asks
IndexWriter to commit what its done so far.
Nguyen, Joe wrote:
Could trigger the co
As far as I know, commit could be triggered by
Manually
1. invoke commit() method
Automatically
2. maxDoc
3. maxTime
Since the document size is arbitrary and some document could be huge,
could commit also be triggered by memory buffered size?
-Original Message-
From: Mark Miller [mail
The documents have an average size of about a kilobyte i would say.
bigger ones can pop up,
but not nearly often enough to trigger memory-commits every couple of
seconds.
I dont have the exact figures, but i would expect the memory buffer
limit to be far beyond the 8000 document one in most of
First it was fast, but after a couple of hours, it was slow down...
Could mergeFactor affect the indexing speed since solr would take time
to merge multiple segments into a single one?
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPerformanceFactors#head-224d9a793c7c57d8
662d5351f955ddf8c0a3ebcd
-Origina
I dont know. After reading my last email, i realized i did not say
explicitly that by 'restarting' i merely meant 'restarting resin' . I
did not restart indexing from scratch. And - if I understand correctly -
if the merge factor was the culprit, restarting the servlet container
would have had
I am trying to figure out how the synonym filter processes multi word
inputs. I have checked the analyzer in the GUI with some confusing results.
The indexed field has ³The North Face² as a value. The synonym file has
morthface, morth face, noethface, noeth face, norhtface, norht face,
nortface,
It appears to me that Amazon is using a 100% minimum match policy. If there
are no matches, they break down the original search terms and give
suggestion search results.
example:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=ipod+nano+4th+generation+8gb+blue+calcium
Have a look at DisMaxRequestHandler and play with mm (miminum terms
should match)
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DisMaxRequestHandler?highlight=%28CategorySo
lrRequestHandler%29%7C%28%28CategorySolrRequestHandler%29%29#head-6c5fe4
1d68f3910ed544311435393f5727408e61
-Original Message-
From:
Hello,
I am looking for the Solr schema equivalent to Lucene's StandardAnalyser.
Is it the Solr schema type:
I understand how to do the "100% mm" part. It's the behavior when there are
no matches that i'm asking about :)
Nguyen, Joe-2 wrote:
>
> Have a look at DisMaxRequestHandler and play with mm (miminum terms
> should match)
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DisMaxRequestHandler?highlight=%28Categ
hi all :)
I'm having difficultly filtering my documents when a field is either
blank or set to a specific value. I would have thought this would work
fq=-Type:[* TO *] OR Type:blue
which I would expect to find all document where either Type is undefined
or Type is "blue". my actual result se
Try: Type:blue OR -Type:[* TO *]
You can't have a negative clause at the beginning. Yes, Lucene should barf
about this.
-Original Message-
From: Geoffrey Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:17 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: filtering on b
I kind if remember hearing that Solr was using SLF4J for the logging, but
I haven't been able to find any information about it. And in that case where
do you set it to redirect to you log4j server for example?
Regards Erik
Lance Norskog wrote:
> Try: Type:blue OR -Type:[* TO *]
>
> You can't have a negative clause at the beginning. Yes, Lucene should barf
> about this.
I did try that, before and again now, and still no luck.
anything else?
--Geoff
the trunk (solr-1.4-dev) is now using SLF4J
If you are using the packaged .war, the behavior should be identical
to 1.3 -- that is, it uses the java.util.logging implementation.
However, if you are using solr.jar, you select what logging framework
you actully want to use by including that c
Seemed like its first search required match all terms.
If it could not find it, like you motioned, you broke down into multiple
smaller term set and ran search to get total hit for each smaller term
set, sort the results by total hits, and display summary page.
Searching for "A B C" would be
1. q
Glen:
$ ff \*Standard\*java | grep analysis
./src/java/org/apache/solr/analysis/HTMLStripStandardTokenizerFactory.java
./src/java/org/apache/solr/analysis/StandardFilterFactory.java
./src/java/org/apache/solr/analysis/StandardTokenizerFactory.java
Does that do it?
Otis
--
Sematext -- http://sem
Does anybody know of a good way to index newsgroups using SOLR?
Basically would like to build a searchable list of newsgroup content.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
-John
Thanks.
I've decided to use:
which appears to be close to what is found at
http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_3_1/api/index.html
"Filters StandardTokenizer with StandardFilter, LowerCaseFilter and
StopFilter, using a list of Engli
Can Nutch crawl newsgroups? Anyone?
-Todd Feak
-Original Message-
From: John Martyniak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 3:06 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Searchable/indexable newsgroups
Does anybody know of a good way to index newsgroups using
Hi,
I wanted to try the TermVectorComponent w/ current schema setup and I
did a build off trunk but it's giving me something like ...
org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: ERROR:unknown field 'DOCTYPE'
Even though it is declared in schema.xml (lowercase), before I grep
replace the entire f
schema fields should be case sensitive... so DOCTYPE != doctype
is the behavior different for you in 1.3 with the same file/schema?
On Nov 19, 2008, at 6:26 PM, Jon Baer wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to try the TermVectorComponent w/ current schema setup and
I did a build off trunk but it's giving
Note that you can use a standard Lucene Analyzer subclass too. The
example schema shows how with this commented out:
Erik
On Nov 19, 2008, at 6:24 PM, Glen Newton wrote:
Thanks.
I've decided to use:
positionIncrementGap="100" >
check procedure:
1: rm -r $tomcat/webapps/*
2: rm -r $solr/data ，，，ur index data directory
3: check xml（any xml u modified）
4: start tomcat
i had same error, but i forgot how to fix...so u can use my check procedure,
i think it will help you
i use tomcat+solr in win2003, freebsd, mac osx 10.5.5,
first u sure the xml is utf-8,,and field value is utf-8,,
second u should post xml by utf-8
my advice : All encoding use utf-8...
it make my solr work well,,, i use chinese
--
regards
j.L
In analyzing a clients Solr logs, from Tomcat, I came across the
exception below. Anyone encountered issues with Tomcat shutdowns or
undeploys of Solr contexts? I'm not sure if this is an anomaly due to
some wonky Tomcat handling, or if this is some kind of bug in Solr. I
haven't actuall
Sorry I should have mentioned this is from using the
DataImportHandler ... it seems case insensitive ... ie my columns are
UPPERCASE and schema field names are lowercase and it works fine in
1.3 but not in 1.4 ... it seems strict. Going to resolve all the
field names to uppercase to see if
Hi John,
it could probably not the expected behavior?
only 'explicit' fields must be case-sensitive.
Could you tell me the usecase or can you paste the data-config?
--Noble
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Jon Baer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry I should have mentioned this is from usi
unfortunately native JS objects are not handled by the ScriptTransformer yet.
but what you can do in the script is create a new
java.util.ArrayList() and add each item into that .
some thing like
var jsarr = ['term','term','term']
var arr = new java.util.ArrayList();
for each in jsarr... arr.add(
Schema:
DIH:
The column is uppercase ... isn't there some automagic happening now
where DIH will introspect the fields @ load time?
- Jon
On Nov 19, 2008, at 11:11 PM, Noble Paul നോബിള്
नोब्ळ् wrote:
Hi John,
it could probably not the expected behavior?
only 'explicit' fields must
So originally you had the field declaration as follows . right?
we did some refactoring to minimize the object creation for
case-insensitive comparisons.
I guess it should be rectified soon.
Thanks for bringing it to our notice.
--Noble
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Jon Baer <[EMAIL PR
Correct ... it is the unfortunate side effect of having some legacy
tables in uppercase :-\ I thought the explicit declaration of field
name attribute was ok.
- Jon
On Nov 19, 2008, at 11:53 PM, Noble Paul നോബിള്
नोब्ळ् wrote:
So originally you had the field declaration as follows . r
Hi,
A requirement has come up in a project where we're going to need to
group by a field in the result set. I looked into the SOLR-236 patch
and it seems there are a couple versions out now that are supposed to
work against the Solr 1.3.0 release.
This is a production site, it really can
Hi Noble
Thanks for your update.
Sorry, that's a typo that I put same name for both soure and dest.
Actually i failed to removed it at some stage of trial and error.
I removed the copyfield as it is not fully necessary at this stage.
My scenario is like:
I have various date fields in my databa
Basically, I am working on two views. First one has an ID column. The
second view has no unique ID column. What to do in such situations?
There are 3 other columns where I can make a composite key out of those.
I have to index these two views now.
-Original Message-
From: Erik Hatcher [m
Eric, which Solr version is that stack trace from?
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> In analyzing a clients Solr logs, from Tomcat, I came across the exception
> below. Anyone encountered issues with Tomcat shutdowns or undeploys of Solr
> contexts? I'm n
Jon, I just committed a fix for this issue at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-873
Can you please use trunk and see if it solved your problem?
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Jon Baer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Correct ... it is the unfortunate side effect of having some legacy tab
51 matches
Mail list logo
