On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Matt B wrote:
> There may be anywhere from one to one million documents in the lists core
> matching any particular list_id.
Matt,
What about reverse cardinality of this relation? ie for particular
listValue term, how many list_ids are associated? it's can be f
[Solr 5.0]
Whereas in
fq={!tag="facet15"}facet15__d_i:1.8 facet15__d_i:2.2
&q=(*:*)
&facet=true
&facet.mincount=1
&facet.field={!key="facet15" ex="facet15"}facet15__d_i
"facet15" is not affected by the fq (as desired). This does not hold true for
the facet.query
fq={!tag="till2"}facet15__d_i:[
Hi,
I am new to solr-cloud, i have connected the zookeepers located on 3 remote
servers. All the configs are uploaded and linked successfully.
Now i am stuck to how to start solr in cloud mode using these external
zookeeper which are remotely located.
Zookeeper is installed at 3 servers and usin
Hi,
I read in various blogs that we should use the odd number of zookeeper in
the ensemble, So why is it so?
With Regards
Aman Tandon
Hi,
You can boost the results of "Test street" by 5, boost the test by 3 and
boost street by 1.5.
With Regards
Aman Tandon
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Rajesh
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to sort my results based on my query string.
>
> For example, If I query by "Test Street", My results shoul
Zookeeper requires a majority of servers to be available. For example: Five
machines ZooKeeper can handle the failure of two machines. That's why odd
numbers are recommended.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Help-needed-to-understand-zookeeper-in-solrcloud-tp4
But how they handle the failure?
With Regards
Aman Tandon
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:17 PM, O. Klein wrote:
> Zookeeper requires a majority of servers to be available. For example: Five
> machines ZooKeeper can handle the failure of two machines. That's why odd
> numbers are recommended.
>
>
>
>
Hi,
Did you check "SolrCloud" section in Ref Guides? You can download PDFs from
here.
http://archive.apache.org/dist/lucene/solr/ref-guide/
Or this. (It's already marked out of date, but still provides basic,
helpful information.)
https://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrCloud
Regards,
Tomoko
2015-03
synchronous update of state and a requirement of more than half the
zookeepers alive (and in sync) this makes it impossible to have a "split
brain" situation ie when you partition a network and get let's say 3 alive
on one side and 2 on the other.
In this case the 2 node networks stops serving req
you mean
&facet.query={!key="from2" ex="till2"}facet15__d_i:[2.0 TO *]
don;t you?
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Clemens Wyss DEV
wrote:
> [Solr 5.0]
> Whereas in
>
> fq={!tag="facet15"}facet15__d_i:1.8 facet15__d_i:2.2
> &q=(*:*)
> &facet=true
> &facet.mincount=1
> &facet.field={!key="facet15
On 3/3/2015 12:42 AM, Damien Kamerman wrote:
> Still no luck starting solr with 40s zkClientTimeout. I'm not seeing any
> expired sessions...
>
> There must be a way to start solr with many collections. It runs fine..
> until a restart is required.
With a longer zkClientTimeout, does the failure
On 3/3/2015 6:55 AM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> With a longer zkClientTimeout, does the failure happen on a later
> collection? I had hoped that it would solve the problem, but I'm
> curious about whether it was able to load more collections before it
> finally died, or whether it made no difference...
On 3/3/2015 12:23 AM, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo wrote:
> The content field is unable to be shown during searching, even though the
> following line has been added to the schema using curl from the resource
> named in 'managedSchemaResourceName'.
>
>
Did you restart Solr (or reload the core/collection)
Hi,
I'm indexing data off a DB. The data is secured with access permission. That
is record-A can be seen by users-x, while record-B can be seen by users-y and
yet record-C can be seen by users x and y. Even more, the group access
permission can change over time.
The question I have is th
Thanks all for the suggestions. Regarding patch SOLR-4787, it seems like this
will only work with long or int fields and not strings like email addresses.
But my coworker suggested the possibility of using a hash to generate long
fields from the string fields, so I may try that out.
-Matt
On 3/3/2015 4:21 AM, Aman Tandon wrote:
> I am new to solr-cloud, i have connected the zookeepers located on 3 remote
> servers. All the configs are uploaded and linked successfully.
>
> Now i am stuck to how to start solr in cloud mode using these external
> zookeeper which are remotely located.
Thanks Shawn, also thanks for sharing info about chroot.
I am trying to implement the solr cloud with solr-5.0.0.
I also checked the documentations https://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrCloud,
the method shown there is using start.jar. But after few update start.jar
(jetty) will not work. So I want to
Hi All,
I have read over and over that SOLR still does not support grouping on
multivalued fields, however I have a requirement in which grouping on multi
valued fields is the perfect solve for.
Has anyone ever worked on a 3rd party library to do this, or is there any
alternative ways to do t
I didn't but I should have ;)
Thx!
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Mikhail Khludnev [mailto:mkhlud...@griddynamics.com]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 3. März 2015 14:48
An: solr-user
Betreff: Re: ex(clude) facet.query ?
you mean
&facet.query={!key="from2" ex="till2"}facet15__d_i:[2.0 TO *] don;t yo
Excuse me for hijacking: I raised
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6332. Please vote if you need.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Matt B wrote:
> I've recently inherited a Solr instance that is required to perform
> numerous joins between two cores, usually as filter queries, simila
Hi,
I am running Solr 5.0.0 and have a question about proximity search and
multiValued fields.
I am indexing xml files of the following form with foundField being a field
defined as multiValued and text_en my in schema.xml.
8
"Oranges from South California - ordered"
"Green Apples - available"
Just set the positionIncrementGap for the multivalued field to a much
higher value, like 1000 or 5000. That's the purpose of this attribute, to
assure that reasonable proximity matches don't match across multiple values.
Also, leave "AND" out of the query phrases - you're just trying to match
the
Jack,
This is exactly what I was looking for, thanks. I found the
positionIncrementGap attribute in the schema.xml for the text_en
I was putting in "AND" because I read in the Solr documentation that "The
OR operator is the default conjunction operator."
Does it mean that words between " symbols
OK, this last query is telling:
{
"responseHeader":{
"status":0,
"QTime":5,
"params":{
"fl":"id,content",
"q":"content:[* TO *]"}},
"response":{"numFound":0,"start":0,"docs":[]
}}
Despite what you think, you are _not_ actually indexing anything to
the "content" field
You really have two choices:
1> index tokens with each doc of those (usually groups) that are
authorized to see them.
Then when a user signs on, the front end assembles the list of
groups that the user
belongs to and appends a filter query to each request like
&fq=auth:(group1 group5 group
Have you seen this page?:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Solr+Start+Script+Reference
This is really "the new way"
Best,
Erick
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 7:18 AM, Aman Tandon wrote:
> Thanks Shawn, also thanks for sharing info about chroot.
>
> I am trying to implement the solr
bq: Does it mean that words between " symbols, such as "Orange ordered" are
treated as a single term, with (implicitly) AND conjunction between them?
not at all. When you quote things, you're getting a "phrase query", perhaps one
with slop. So something like
"a b" means that 'a' must appear right
Erick,
Thanks a lot for the explanation, makes sense now.
Tom
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Erick Erickson
wrote:
> bq: Does it mean that words between " symbols, such as "Orange ordered" are
> treated as a single term, with (implicitly) AND conjunction between them?
>
> not at all. When you
David,
Is it possible to write a query to join two cores and either bring back data
from the two cores or to boost on the data coming back from either of the
cores? Is that possible with Solr?
Raavi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-join-Boost-in-single
Yes, I have reindex all my documents. In fact I have delete the entire data
directory to start fresh.
There's nothing interesting shown in the logs when I sent the doc to Solr,
it just says that the doc is successfully indexed as per normal.
Here's the schema which I'm using. The content field is
After one minute from startup I sometimes see the
'org.apache.solr.cloud.ZkController; Timed out waiting to see all nodes
published as DOWN in our cluster state.'
And I see the 'Still seeing conflicting information about the leader of
shard' after about 5 minutes.
Thanks Shawn, I will create an iss
On 3/2/2015 12:54 AM, Damien Kamerman wrote:
> I still see the same cloud startup issue with Solr 5.0.0. I created 4,000
> collections from scratch and then attempted to stop/start the cloud.
I have been trying to duplicate your setup using the "-e cloud" example
included in the Solr 5.0 download
Hi,
I found when a replica recovering, one of cpu core (usually cpu0) will load
100%, and then leader update will fail cause this replica can not response
leader’s /update command
this will cause leader send other recovery to this replica then this replica in
a recover loop.
my question is i
No, not without writing something custom anyway. It'd be difficult to make it
fast if there's a lot of documents to join on.
sraav wrote
> David,
>
> Is it possible to write a query to join two cores and either bring back
> data from the two cores or to boost on the data coming back from either
David,
Thank you for the reply.
How about boosting on the records that match the both the cores or may be
boosting on join may be? Is there a way we can do that?
Raav
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-join-Boost-in-single-query-tp4190825p4190852.html
S
It's always important to tell us _what_ version of Solr you are
running. There have
been many improvements in this whole area, perhaps it's already fixed?
Best,
Erick
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:20 PM, 龚俊衡 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I found when a replica recovering, one of cpu core (usually cpu0) will load
I've done a similar thing to create the collections. You're going to need
more memory I think.
OK, so maxThreads limit on jetty could be causing a distributed dead-lock?
On 4 March 2015 at 13:18, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 3/2/2015 12:54 AM, Damien Kamerman wrote:
> > I still see the same cloud
This seems very much like it may be an "XY" problem.
>From Hossman's apache page:
Your question appears to be an "XY Problem" ... that is: you are dealing
with "X", you are assuming "Y" will help you, and you are asking about "Y"
without giving more details about the "X" so that we can understand
Or do you think there is a way to do a union between the two cores?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-join-Boost-in-single-query-tp4190825p4190860.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Eric,
I am trying to boost the fields that match both the cores to the top of the
list. Or atleast get a union of the two cores.
Thanks,
Raavi
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-join-Boost-in-single-query-tp4190825p4190861.html
Sent from the Solr - User
Hi, Erick
Thanks for you quick replay,
we are using Solr 4.9.0 and use 4 Aliyun cloud instance with 4 core cpu 32G mem
and 1G SSD
shard distribute as:
we have 4 shard
Node
shard1_0
shard1_1
shard2_0
shard2_1
prmsop01 10.173.225.147
E
E
prmsop02 10.173.226.78
E
E
prmsop03 10.173.225.163
sorry mail list reformat my email
> On Mar 4, 2015, at 13:47, 龚俊衡 wrote:
>
> Hi, Erick
>
> Thanks for you quick replay,
>
> we are using Solr 4.9.0 and use 4 Aliyun cloud instance with 4 core cpu 32G
> mem and 1G SSD
>
> shard distribute as:
>
> we have 4 shard
>
> Node
> shard1_0
>
sounds like https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6234 ? doesn't it?
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:40 AM, sraav wrote:
> David,
>
> Is it possible to write a query to join two cores and either bring back
> data
> from the two cores or to boost on the data coming back from either of the
> cores?
Hi All,
I am using solr 4.7.2 is there a bug wrt merging the segments down ?
I recently added the following to my solrConfig.xml
false
100
1000
5
But I do not see any merging of the segments happening. I saw some other people
have
the same issue but there wasn’t much i
44 matches
Mail list logo
