Hello,
I use the PECL php extension for SOLR. I want my output in JSON.
This is not working:
$query->set('wt', 'json');
How do i solve this problem?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/PECL-SOLR-PHP-extension-JSON-output-tp2846092p2846092.html
Sent from the S
There is a jar for the tests in solr.
I added this dependency in my pom.xml :
org.apache.solr
solr-core
3.1-SNAPSHOT
tests
test
jar
Ludovic.
-
Jouve
France.
--
View this message in context:
http://luce
Hi Kevin,
I think you made OS06Y the uniqueKey, right?
So, in entity 1 you specify values for it, but in entity 2 you do so as
well.
I am not absolutely sure about this, but: It seems like your two entities
create two documents and the second will overwrite the first.
Have a look at this page:
h
This really helps at the mailinglists.
If you send your mails with Thunderbird, be sure to check that you enforce
plain-text-emails. If not, it will often send HTML-mails.
Regards,
Em
Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:30:29AM -0400, Trey Grainger wrote:
>> (FREEMAIL_FROM,FS
Hi,
I agree with Yonik here - I do not understand what you would like to do as
well.
But some additional note from my side:
Your FQs never influences the score! Of course you can specify the same
query twice, once as a filter - query and once as a regular query but I do
not see the reason to do so
Hi Tjong,
seems like your XML was invalid.
Try the following and compare it to your original config:
Regards,
Em
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/entity-name-issue-tp2843812p2846326.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive
Thanks Em.
Yes, OS06Y is the uniqueKey.
Table1 and Table2 is parallel in my example.
In the Url:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DIHQuickStart#Index_data_from_multiple_table
s_into_Solr
The tables don't have parallel relations in the above URL example
I want to know that can solr implement the case?
1.
Hi Robert,
we often ran into the same issue with stemmers. This is why we created more
than one field, each field with different stemmers. It adds some overhead
but worked quite well.
Regarding your off-topic-question:
Look at the debugging-output of your searches. Sometimes you configured your
t
Not sure I understood you correct:
You expect that OS06Y stores *two* different performanceIds? One from table1
and the other from table2?
I think this may be a problem.
If both OS06Y-keys are equal, than you can use the syntax as mentioned in
the wiki without any problems. You just have to rewri
Is it possible to create solr core dyanamically?
In our case we want each workspace to have its own solr index.
Thanks
> From: chandan.tamra...@nepasoft.com
> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:57:53 +0545
> Subject: Re: Need to create dyanamic indexies base on different document
> workspaces
> To:
Hi Stockii,
how did you configured your segments-number in Solrconfig.xml?
Decrease the number to speed up things automatically.
Regards,
Em
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/how-to-abort-a-running-optimize-tp2838721p2846369.html
Sent from the Solr - User maili
Yes, have a look at the wiki-page. It explains some configurations and
REST-API-methods to create cores dynamically and if/how they are persisted.
Regards,
Em
Gaurav Shingala wrote:
>
> Is it possible to create solr core dyanamically?
>
> In our case we want each workspace to have its own sol
I try "remove the OS06Y-field from your second entity ",import the
second entity failed.
Give a example:
Table1:
OS06Y=123,f1=100,f2=200,f3=300;
OS06Y=456,f1=100,f2=200,f3=300;
Table2:
OS06Y=123,f4=100,f5=200;
OS06Y=456,f4=100;
OS06Y=789,f4=100;
I want the result:
OS06Y=123,f1=100,f2=200,f3=300
Actually you need to put a file named *solr.xml* in the solr.home directory
to create the solr core .
you can do that programatically if you want to make it dynamic based on your
logic
pls check the solr core admin document.
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Gaurav Shingala <
gaurav.shing...@ho
What you want to do is something like a left outer join, isn't it ?
something like : select table2.OS06Y, f1,f2,f3,f4,f5 from table2 left outer
join table1 on table2.OS06Y = table1.OS06Y where ...
could you prepare a view in your RDBMS ? That could be another solution ?
Ludovic.
-
Jouve
Fra
As Iboutrus mentioned, if you can summarize it in a query, than yes, Solr can
handle it.
Make a step backward: Do not think of Solr. Write a query (one! query) that
shows exactly the output you exepct. Afterwards, implement this query as a
source for DIH.
Regards,
Em
--
View this message in con
Additionally, there is an already set up example for a multicore-setup in the
example directory of your Solr-distribution.
Regards,
Em
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Need-to-create-dyanamic-indexies-base-on-different-document-workspaces-tp2845919p2846417.html
Yes, it is like the left outer join.
In my example.the table may be table or view or stored procedure,I can
not change it in database.
If for every id in table1,we need search the fields by id from table2 in
database,it will met performance issue,especially the size of tables are
very big.
-Or
hello i have one datasource - is sql server db and
second datasource - is file but dynamic means based on first
datasource db record i want to fetch one file that's why i try to use
tikaentityprocessor but got following error
org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImportHandlerExce
give it a try: http://php.net/manual/en/solrclient.setresponsewriter.php
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:03 AM, roySolr wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I use the PECL php extension for SOLR. I want my output in JSON.
>
> This is not working:
>
> $query->set('wt', 'json');
>
> How do i solve this problem?
>
>
>
> -
On 20.04.11 18:51, Robert Muir wrote:
Hi, there is a proposed patch uploaded to the issue. Maybe you can
help by reviewing/testing it?
if i succeed in compiling solr, i can test the patch. Is this the right
starting point
for such an endeavour ? http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HackingSolr
-rob
can i see your tikaconfig.xml?
meanwhile have a look at this bug:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2116
a similar thread also exists:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/TikaEntityProcessor-td2839188.html
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Unable-to-load
I have tried that but it seems like JSON is not supported
Parameters
responseWriter
One of the following :
- xml
- phpnative
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/PECL-SOLR-PHP-extension-JSON-output-tp2846092p2846728.html
Sent from the Solr - Use
Hello,
I'm trying out sorting by function with the new function queries and invariably
getting this error:
Can't determine Sort Order: 'termfreq(name,samsung)', pos=22
Here's an example call:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=*:*&sort=termfreq%28name,samsung%29
What am I doing wrong?
Tha
Hm yes correct .. there is a explicit validation of response-writers in place.
if you want to modify it yourself, check the current trunk
(http://svn.php.net/repository/pecl/solr/trunk/) modify
solr_constants.h, define another response_writer and add another check
in solr_functions_helpers.c in fu
Hi Em,
Thanks a lot! But it still does not work. Actually my "where" clause in my
query was '${dataimporter.request.clean}' != 'false' and
myschema.table_a.aid=${dataimporter.request.aid}" which I used to pass a
value to the full import process, and it worked without the prefix
"myschema." on syba
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Otis Gospodnetic
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying out sorting by function with the new function queries and
> invariably
> getting this error:
>
> Can't determine Sort Order: 'termfreq(name,samsung)', pos=22
>
> Here's an example call:
> http://localhost:8983/solr/
OK, so I copied my index and ran solr3.1 against it.
Qtime dropped, from about 40s to 17s! This is good news, but still longer
than i hoped for.
I tried to do the same text with 4.0, but i'm getting
IndexFormatTooOldException since my index was created using 1.4.1. Is my
only chance to test this is
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Ofer Fort wrote:
> Another strange behavior is that the Qtime seems pretty stable, no matter
> how many object match my query. 200K and 20K both take about 17s.
> I would have guessed that since the time is going over all the terms of all
> the subset documents, wo
Not sure i fully understand,
If "facet.method=enum steps over all terms in the index for that field",
than what does setting the q=field:subset do? if i set the q=*:*, than how
do i get the frequency only on my subset?
Ofer
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 20
Am 21.04.2011 13:58, schrieb roySolr:
I have tried that but it seems like JSON is not supported
Parameters
responseWriter
One of the following :
- xml
- phpnative
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/PECL-SOLR-PHP-extension-JSON-output-tp28
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Ofer Fort wrote:
> Not sure i fully understand,
> If "facet.method=enum steps over all terms in the index for that field",
> than what does setting the q=field:subset do? if i set the q=*:*, than how
> do i get the frequency only on my subset?
It's an implementati
I see, thanks.
So if I would want to implement something that would fit my needs, would
going through the subset of documents and counting all the terms in each
one, would be faster? and easier to implement?
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:44 AM, O
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Ofer Fort wrote:
> I see, thanks.
> So if I would want to implement something that would fit my needs, would
> going through the subset of documents and counting all the terms in each
> one, would be faster? and easier to implement?
That's not just your needs, th
So if i want to use the facet.method=fc, is there a way to speed it up? and
remove the bucket size limitation?
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Ofer Fort wrote:
> > I see, thanks.
> > So if I would want to implement something that would fit
Good to know; I'll go change those settings, then. Thanks for the feedback.
-Trey
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:42 AM, Em wrote:
>
> This really helps at the mailinglists.
> If you send your mails with Thunderbird, be sure to check that you enforce
> plain-text-emails. If not, it will often send H
Hey Bernd,
Checkout https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2469. There is a
pretty bad bug in Solr 3.1 which occurs if you have startup set in your replication
configuration in solrconfig.xml. See the thread between Yonik and
myself from a few days ago titled "Solr 3.1: Old Index Files Not
Adding another field with another stemmer and searching both??? Wow never
thought of doing that. I guess that doesn't really double the size of your
index tho because all the terms are almost the same right? Let me look into
that. I'll raise the other issue in a separate thread and thanks.
Are there no ideas of how to use multiple tags per filter or to combine some
tags for excluding more than one filter per facet?
Regards,
Em
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Multiple-Tags-and-Facets-tp2843130p2847569.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list a
As far as I know Lucene does not store an inverted index per field, so no, it
would not double the size of the index.
However, it could influence the score a little bit.
For example: If both stemmers reduce "schools" to "school" and you are
searching for "all schools in america" the term "school"
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Ofer Fort wrote:
> So if i want to use the facet.method=fc, is there a way to speed it up? and
> remove the bucket size limitation?
Not really - else we would have done it already ;-)
We don't really have great methods for faceting on full-text fields
(as opposed
Nice! Thanks!
-Original Message-
From: Em [mailto:mailformailingli...@yahoo.de]
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 9:23 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: stemming filter analyzers, any favorites?
As far as I know Lucene does not store an inverted index per field, so no, it
wou
Hello,
I am trying to query a solr server in order to obtain the most relevant
results for a list of terms.
For example i have the list of words "nokia", "iphone", "charger"
My schema contains the following data:
nokia
iphone
nokia iphone otherwords
nokia white
iphone white
If I run a simple qu
I don't think I understand what you're trying to do. Are you trying to
preserve all facets after a user clicks on a facet, and thereby triggers a
filter query, which excludes the other facets? If that's the case, you can
use local parameters to tag the filter queries so they are not used for the
fa
I've been using Solr for a while now, indexing 2-4 million records
using the DIH to pull data from MySQL, which has been working great.
For a new project, I need to index about 20M records (30 fields) and I
have been running into issues with MySQL disconnects, right around
15M. I've tried several r
Hi Jay,
thank you for your reply.
We most enhance your example to reproduce what I mean:
You got the following facets:
project:
- Solr
- Lucene
- Nutch
- Mahout
source:
- Documentation
- Mailinglist
- Wiki
- Commercial Websites
What I want now is: When I click on Solr + Documentation
(fq={tag
Hi all,
I have an mlt search set up on my site with over 2 million records in the
index. Normally, my results look like:
0
204
Some result.
A similar result
...
And there are 100 results under response. However, in some cases, there
: I watched an online video with Chris Hostsetter from Lucidimagination. He
: showed the possibility of having some Facets that exclude *all* filter while
: also having some Facets that take care of some of the set filters while
: ignoring other filters.
FWIW: That webinar is nearly identical to t
we're indexing around 10M records from a mysql database into
a single solr core.
The DataImportHandler needs to join 3 sub-entities to denormalize
the data.
We've run into some troubles for the first 2 attempts, but setting
batchSize="-1" for the dataSource resolved the issues.
Do you need a lo
Perhaps a better place to start is here:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToContribute#Contributing_Code_.28Features.2C_Big_Fixes.2C_Tests.2C_etc29
That page also has information about setting up Eclipse or IntelliJ
environments. But the place to start is to get the source and get to
the point w
Well, it was worth the try;-)
But will using the facet.method=fc, will reducing the subset size
reduce the time and memory? Meaning is it an O( ndocs of the set)?
Thanks
On Thursday, April 21, 2011, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Ofer Fort wrote:
>> So if i want to use th
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:25 PM, Ofer Fort wrote:
> Well, it was worth the try;-)
> But will using the facet.method=fc, will reducing the subset size
> reduce the time and memory? Meaning is it an O( ndocs of the set)?
facet.method=fc builds a multi-valued fieldcache like structure
(UnInvertedFie
Hi all,
While doing some tests, I realized that an index that was created with
solr 1.4.1 is readable by solr 3.1, but nt readable by solr 4.0.
If I plan to migrate my index to 4.0, and I prefer not to reindex it
all, what would be my best course of action?
Will it be possible to continue to write
Thanks for your response!
I think the issue is that the records are being returned TOO fast from
MySQL. I can dump them to CSV in about 30 minutes, but building the
solr index takes hours on the system I'm using. I may just need to use
a more powerful Solr instance so it doesn't leave MySQL hangin
So I'm guessing my best approach now would be to test trunk, and hope
that as 3.1 cut the performance in half, trunk will do the same
Thanks for the info
Ofer
On Friday, April 22, 2011, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:25 PM, Ofer Fort wrote:
>> Well, it was worth the try;-)
>> Bu
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Ofer Fort wrote:
> So I'm guessing my best approach now would be to test trunk, and hope
> that as 3.1 cut the performance in half, trunk will do the same
Trunk prob won't be much better... but the bulkpostings branch
possibly could be.
-Yonik
http://www.lucenere
Thank you Hoss.
I will try the comma-separated thing out. It seems to be what I searched
for. :)
Regards,
Em
Chris Hostetter-3 wrote:
>
> : I watched an online video with Chris Hostsetter from Lucidimagination.
> He
> : showed the possibility of having some Facets that exclude *all* filter
> wh
Ok, I'll give it a try, as this is a server I am willing to risk.
How is the competability between solrj of bulkpostings, trunk, 3.1 and 1.4.1?
On Friday, April 22, 2011, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Ofer Fort wrote:
>> So I'm guessing my best approach now would be to t
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Ofer Fort wrote:
> Ok, I'll give it a try, as this is a server I am willing to risk.
> How is the competability between solrj of bulkpostings, trunk, 3.1 and 1.4.1?
bulkpostings, trunk, and 3.1 should all be relatively solrj
compatible. But the SolrJ javabin form
Ok, thanks
On Friday, April 22, 2011, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Ofer Fort wrote:
>> Ok, I'll give it a try, as this is a server I am willing to risk.
>> How is the competability between solrj of bulkpostings, trunk, 3.1 and 1.4.1?
>
> bulkpostings, trunk, and 3.1 sho
: For a new project, I need to index about 20M records (30 fields) and I
: have been running into issues with MySQL disconnects, right around
: 15M. I've tried several remedies I've found on blogs, changing
if you can provide some concrete error/log messages and the details of how
you are config
So if I don't put preserveOriginal=1 in my WordDelimiterFilterFactory settings
I cannot get a match between AppleTV on the indexing side and appletv on the
search side. Without that setting the all lowercase version of AppleTV is in
term position two due to the catenateWords=1 or the catenateAl
Thanks for the e-mail. I probably should have provided more details,
but I was more interested in making sure I was approaching the problem
correctly (using DIH, with one big SELECT statement for millions of
rows) instead of solving this specific problem. Here's a partial
stacktrace from this speci
Can you post the dataconfig.XML? Probably you didn't use batch size
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 21, 2011, at 5:09 PM, Scott Bigelow wrote:
> Thanks for the e-mail. I probably should have provided more details,
> but I was more interested in making sure I was approaching the problem
> correctly (
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Robert Petersen wrote:
> So if I don't put preserveOriginal=1 in my WordDelimiterFilterFactory
> settings I cannot get a match between AppleTV on the indexing side and
> appletv on the search side.
Hmmm, that shouldn't be the case. The "text" field in the solr
I know that the _val_ is the only thing influencing the score.
The fq is just to limit also by those queries.
What I am asking is if it is possible to just influence the score using
_val_ but not in the Q parameter?
Something like bq=val_:"{!type=dismax qf=$qqf v=$qspec}"
_val_:"{!type=dismax
q
66 matches
Mail list logo
