> The reason why I use useFastVectorHighlighter is because I
> want to set stored="false", and with more settings
> like termVectors="true" termPositions="true"
> termOffsets="true". If stored="true", what is the difference
> between normal highlight and useFastVectorHighlighter? What
> is the rig
So for highlight, stored="true" is required in any circumstance, right?
-Original Message-
From: Ahmet Arslan [mailto:iori...@yahoo.com]
Sent: 2012年5月29日 16:04
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: useFastVectorHighlighter doesn't work
> The reason why I use useFastVectorHighli
> So for highlight, stored="true" is
> required in any circumstance, right?
Exactly. http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FieldOptionsByUseCase
Hello all,
The page http://wiki.apache.org/solr/NewSolrCloudDesign is mentioning
"Replication Factor"
It is a feature supported by Katta. Is it actually supported by SolrCloud ?
A more general question: katta had some pretty good features like this one.
Why is katta not active anymore ? Is ther
*1)* With faceting, how does facet.query perform in comparison to
facet.field? I'm just wondering this as in my use case, I need to facet over
a field -- which would get me the top n facets for that field, but I also
need to show the count for a "selected filter" which might have a relatively
low c
Hi all,
I have an index with thousands of products with various fields
(manufacturer, price, popularity, type, color, ...) and I want to
guarantee at least one product by a particular manufacturer to be within
the first 5 results.
The search is done mainly by using filter params and results
Hello Elisabeth,
my synonyms.txt is like your 2nd example:
naturwald, φυσικό\ δάσος, естествена\ гора, prírodný\ les, naravni\ gozd,
foresta\ naturale, natuurbos, natural\ forest, bosque\ natural, természetes\
erdő,
natūralus\ miškas, prirodna\ šuma, dabiskais\ mežs, floresta\ natural,
natursko
Hi Walter,
Thank you. Do you mean that optimize need not be used at all?
If Solr merges segments (when needed as you said), is there a criteria
during which Solr does this automatically. If I want the search to be faster
and Solr does not optimize for quite a long time, would it not co
Hi Suajtha,
each webapps has its own solr home ?
Ludovic.
-
Jouve
France.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Multicore-Issue-Server-Restart-tp3986516p3986602.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
That issue is marked as a duplicate of SOLR-3134, which has a patch for Solr
3.5.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3134
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Ramprakash Ramamoorthy
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 3:03 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Solr - 1143
Hmmm interesting, that will definitely work and may be the way to go.
Ideally, I'd rather store the older versions within a field of the newest
if possible.
Can one create a custom field that holds other objects?
Nick
On Mon, 28 May 2012 17:07:06 -0700, Lance Norskog
wrote:
> You can use the do
You do not need to use optimize at all.
Solr continually merges segments ("optimizes") as needed.
wunder
On May 29, 2012, at 6:08 AM, sudarshan wrote:
> Hi Walter,
> Thank you. Do you mean that optimize need not be used at all?
> If Solr merges segments (when needed as you said), is
Hello,
we're having some issues with a Solr query and are unsure if we've
encountered a bug or just don't understand the expected behaviour. Any help
would be appreciated.
The problem is this: we're running a query using the browser that for
debugging purposes looks like this:
q={!sort%3D"eventId
Hi List,
I am curious about the meaning of tf-idf vector after reading this
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/TermVectorComponent.
The tf flag returns me the tf vector for just one doc. The df flag
returns me the df vector of all the docs in the index.
Does the tf-idf vector represents one doc or set
"Does the tf-idf vector represents one doc or set of docs?"
IDF is calculated across all docs that contain the term.
TF is calculated for a single document containing the term.
Each term of each doc will have its own tf-idf.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Allen
Sent: Tue
IMO it would be a better (from Solr's perspective) to handle the security w/
the application code. Each query could include a "?fq=userID:12345..." which
would limit results to only what that user is allowed to see.
Mike
-Original Message-
From: Mike Douglass [mailto:mikeadougl...@gma
That's what we do. It has the advantage of letting the general queries
be cached once across all users.
Michael
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Klostermeyer, Michael
wrote:
> IMO it would be a better (from Solr's perspective) to handle the security w/
> the application code. Each query could
: And it might make sense to have a "multi-value flattening" attribute for Solr
: itself rather than in SolrCell.
Coming in 4.0...
https://builds.apache.org/view/G-L/view/Lucene/job/Solr-trunk/javadoc/org/apache/solr/update/processor/ConcatFieldUpdateProcessorFactory.html
DOC
Concatenat
Hi,
Could any one explain me about the internals of Backup / Replication. Please
give me more information like do's and don'ts of Backup / Replication.
1. Is the backup / replication incremental ?
2. While taking backup / replication, Whether Solr could add / update the index?
3. Backup comma
I was wondering if there is any solution for this.
Currently I expand my results to match the synonyms at query time.
So if I entered James, I would get results for Jim, Gomes, Game etc as they
would be expanded by matching the synonyms for James. But then since this is
just a one word match, tf,
Hi
I am building web app/mobile app, where users can update information
frequently and there is a search function to quick search the information
using different types of searches.
Most of the data is going to be posted in JSON Format and stored in JSON
format
I have a few questions on the arch
Hi
I am building web app/mobile app, where users can update information
frequently and there is a search function to quick search the information
using different types of searches.
Most of the data is going to be posted in JSON Format and stored in JSON
format
I have a few questions on the arch
Sounds good. Then all that will be needed is a way to disable the SolrCell
flattening so that other update processors can see the unflattened field
values before they are handled off to a ConcatFieldUpdateProcessor them.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Chris Hostetter
Sent
Although Solr uses XML format for document update and query, JSON is a
supported option.
To post documents in JSON, see:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/UpdateJSON
To retrieve query results in JSON, see:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolJSON
That works well for relatively flat data (each field has a
Hi Jack
Thanks for the information. I do have multi-level nesting of JSON data.
So back to my questions, apologize for repeating...
1. Should I use MongoDB to store the JSON documents, or does Solr natively
store the documents in the data directory
2. Does Solr require a specific schema for
1. Yes, and 2. Yes. :)
Solr's adding more NoSQL-like features for 4.0, but in the meantime,
you're better off storing documents with a complex schema in a
document store and using Solr for findability. Basically the schema
for a document in Solr/Lucene is flat (although it can contain
arbitrarily-
Could you give us an example of one of your documents. Then we can give you
better feedback on what makes sense within Solr.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: rjain15
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 2:20 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: MongoDB and Solr
Hi Jack
T
Greetings,
Has anybody gotten Solr 3.6.0 to work well with Jetty 7.6.3, and if so,
would you mind sharing your config files / directory structure / other
useful details?
Thanks,
Aaron
Thank you.
That sounds good - are we sure to get no leakage with this approach?
I'd be indexing personal information which must not be delivered without
authentication.
The solr instance is front-ended by bedework which can handle the auth and
adding a query term.
> IMO it would be a better (fr
Hi
This is a sample schema, but it can be more nested as I build the app. As
more students enroll, or more classes are added, it will grow.
colleges
[
"college":
{
"id" : "college Id"
"classes":
On 29 May 2012 22:27, rjain15 wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am building web app/mobile app, where users can update information
> frequently and there is a search function to quick search the information
> using different types of searches.
>
> Most of the data is going to be posted in JSON Format and stored i
It's a similar approach as using SQL to filter the rows brought back
for a particular user from a table. It's strong as long as you write
your queries correctly, you store your data properly, and you guard
against injection and privilege escalation. There's an added bonus in
this case in that the u
You do get relevancy related "leakage" though. With users content all in the
same index and using the same field names, term and document frequencies across
the index will be used for scoring. This may be (and has been) a good reason
to keep separately searchable content in different indexes/c
In our particular case, we're using this index to do prefix searches
for autocomplete of sparse keyword data, so we don't have much to
worry about on this front, but I do agree that it's a consideration
for those use cases that do reveal information via ranking.
Michael Della Bitta
--
Solr uses a flat schema. You can store old versions, but you have to
encode them somehow and save them as data.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Nicholas Ball
wrote:
>
> Hmmm interesting, that will definitely work and may be the way to go.
> Ideally, I'd rather store the older versions within a f
That was one of my concerns. To date I've been using lucene directly and
pointing it at an index for the current authenticated user. solr cores
seemed to come close to that.
Is the issue with a lot of cores just creating a lot or using many cores
concurrently?
Erik Hatcher-4 wrote
>
> You do g
Hello Bernd,
Thanks a lot for your answer. I'll work on this.
Best regards,
Elisabeth
2012/5/29 Bernd Fehling
> Hello Elisabeth,
>
> my synonyms.txt is like your 2nd example:
>
> naturwald, φυσικό\ δάσος, естествена\ гора, prírodný\ les, naravni\ gozd,
> foresta\ naturale, natuurbos, natural\
I recently have had the same use case. I wound up doing this: in both
index and query time, the synonyms file is 'expand=false'. All
multi-word synonyms map to one single-word synonym (per group). This
way, only the main word is indexed or queried.
If the synonym file changes, you have to re-index
hi iorixxx,
Sorry I missed your reply. Let me put my requirement in another way.
I have a description field which holds more text(2-3 para graphs) and it is
indexed.
When User search for any word, if solr finds that word in description I want
to show the content probably 2-3 lines which matches
Hi Gora,
I am working on a Mobile App, which is updating/accessing/searching data and
I have created a simple prototype using Solr and the Update JSON / Get JSON
functions of Solr.
I came across some discussion on MongoDB and how it natively stores JSON
data, and hence as I was looking at scala
Solr does not natively store/index/search arbitrary JSON documents.
It accepts JSON in a specific format for document input.
wunder
On May 29, 2012, at 3:21 PM, rjain15 wrote:
> Hi Gora,
>
> I am working on a Mobile App, which is updating/accessing/searching data and
> I have created a simple
Thanks a lot, It's quite clear now.
-Original Message-
From: Ahmet Arslan [mailto:iori...@yahoo.com]
Sent: 2012年5月29日 16:37
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: useFastVectorHighlighter doesn't work
> So for highlight, stored="true" is
> required in any circumstance, right?
Exa
On 30 May 2012 03:51, rjain15 wrote:
> Hi Gora,
>
> I am working on a Mobile App, which is updating/accessing/searching data and
> I have created a simple prototype using Solr and the Update JSON / Get JSON
> functions of Solr.
>
> I came across some discussion on MongoDB and how it natively store
43 matches
Mail list logo
