We are using GC tuning options: Xgcpolicy:gencon , verbose:gc.
RAM: 64GB
Solr heap: -Xms512m -Xmx32768m
Index per server: 500G
Surprisingly, running different setup on same machines, 64 collections / 1
shard per collection gives significantly better results.
Any ideas?
Thank you,
Esther
From
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7982
We have a 3 Zookeeper 5 solr server Solrcloud.
We created collection1 and collection2 with 80 shards respectively in the
cloud, replicateFactor is 2.
But after created, we found in a same collection, the coreNodeName has some
duplicate in core.prop
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 11:23 +0300, Esther Goldbraich wrote:
> We are using GC tuning options: Xgcpolicy:gencon , verbose:gc.
> RAM: 64GB
> Solr heap: -Xms512m -Xmx32768m
> Index per server: 500G
Expecting "Your RAM size should be equal to index size"-posts to arrive
in 3, 2, 1...
> Surprisingly,
On 26/08/15 18:05, Erick Erickson wrote:
> bq: my dog
> has fleas
> I wouldn't want some variant of "og ha" to match,
>
> Here's where the mysterious "positionIncrementGap" comes in. If you
> make this field "multiValued", and index this like this:
>
> my dog
> has fleas
>
>
> then the positi
:)
Yes, 64 collections / 1 shard is compared to 1 collection / 64 shards
(with router.name=compositeId) on Solr 5.
Quering with "_route_" should not eliminate distributed search overhead?
What is the difference in distribution mechanism between Solr 4 & Solr 5?
Especially is there any change in
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 13:16 +0300, Esther Goldbraich wrote:
> Yes, 64 collections / 1 shard is compared to 1 collection / 64 shards
> (with router.name=compositeId) on Solr 5.
> Quering with "_route_" should not eliminate distributed search overhead?
Caveat: I am guessing a bit here.
When you sp
Found the reason for many evictions (bug in our code), please ignore the
specific question on filter cache.
All other questions (in bold) are still very relevant.
From: Esther Goldbraich/Haifa/IBM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Date: 27/08/2015 01:13 PM
Subject:Re: Solr 5.2.1 v
Do result grouping and tagging and excluding filters feature works with
JSON sub-faceting? If yes, it will be a great help if someone point me to
some documentation for the same.
Thanks in advance.
Thanks & Regards,
--
*Pritam Kute*
Thanks Erick.
Your summary about doc IDs is much helpful.
I tested the second level sort with a small set of data (10K records) and
didn't see much of a significant impact. I will test with a 10m records at
some time later.
Steve
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Erick Erickson
wrote:
> Gett
On 8/27/2015 3:26 AM, Toke Eskildsen wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 11:23 +0300, Esther Goldbraich wrote:
>> We are using GC tuning options: Xgcpolicy:gencon , verbose:gc.
>> RAM: 64GB
>> Solr heap: -Xms512m -Xmx32768m
>> Index per server: 500G
Is this in use for Solr 5.2.1 as well? The start scr
I don't think there is a way to do this now. Maybe we should separate the
logic of creating the SolrIndexSearcher to a factory. Moving this logic
away from SolrCore is already a win, plus it will make it easier to unit
test and extend for advanced use cases.
Tomás
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 8:10 PM,
That makes sense, then I could extend the SolrIndexSearcher by creating a
different factory class that did whatever magic I needed. If you create a
Jira ticket for this please link it here so I can track it! Again thanks
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Tomás Fernández Löbbe <
tomasflo...@gmail
Also in this vein I think that Lucene should support factories for the
cache creation as described @
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2394. I'm not endorsing the
patch that is provided (I haven't even looked at it) just the concept in
general.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Jamie J
The FieldCache has become implementation rather than interface, so I
don't think you're going to see plugins at that level (it's all
package protected now).
One could either subclass or re-implement UnInvertingReader though.
-Yonik
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Jamie Johnson wrote:
> Also
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Tomás Fernández Löbbe
wrote:
> I don't think there is a way to do this now. Maybe we should separate the
> logic of creating the SolrIndexSearcher to a factory.
That should probably be extended down to where lucene creates
searchers as well (delete-by-query).
Rig
Hi,
Sorry to spam everyone with this email.
I am not able to get emails into my inbox from Solr mailing list. However,
I am able to send mails to the mailing list. I am able to see them on the
mail archive on the website. In case anyone replies to my mail, it appears
in the archive, but I don't r
You were subscribed to the "allow" list, meaning you could post, but
would not receive messages.
This is almost certainly because you started sending mails to the list
without subscribing first. Moderators then moderated through your
request in such a way as to allow you to post in future - as in,
Hi Everyone
Per
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Language+Analysis#LanguageAnalysis-Language-SpecificFactories
I see the languages Solr supports. Where is Traditional Chinese? Is CJK
the one?
Thanks
Steve
I think a custom UnInvertingReader would work as I could skip the process
of putting things in the cache. Right now in Solr 4.x though I am caching
based but including the users authorities in the key of the cache so we're
not rebuilding the UnivertedField on every request. Where in 5.x is the
ob
Hi Tim,
For some reason, I was not receiving messages from Solr mailing list, though
I could post it to the list. Now I got that sorted. For my below query, I
saw your response on the mailing list. Below is the snippet of your
response:
Hi Vijay,
Verify the ResourceManager URL and tr
UnInvertingReader makes indexed fields look like docvalues fields.
The caching itself is still done in FieldCache/FieldCacheImpl
but you could perhaps wrap what is cached there to either screen out
stuff or construct a new entry based on the user.
-Yonik
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Jamie J
Thanks Yonik. I currently am using this to negate the score of a document
given the value of a particular field within the document, then using a
custom AnalyticQuery to only collect documents with a score > 0. Will this
also impact the faceting counts?
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 8:32 PM, Yonik See
Hi Team, Can someone help on implementing filter to ignore "," in string?
e.g. I have "Technical, Specification"
If I search "Technical' or "Technical, Specification" I have to get this
results, but current I am not .
Simply Ignore the "," I can't index the existing Data as it is very huge ,
Actually I should have just tried this before asking but I'll say what I'm
seeing and maybe someone can confirm.
Faceting looks like it took this into account, i.e. the counts were 0 for
values that were in documents that I removed using my AnalyticQuery. I had
expected that the AnalyticsQuery mi
This is both very specific and very general question at the same time.
The way indexing and search are both done is via analyzer chains, as
defined in your schema. So, you need to check what the definition is
for the field you search and then play with that.
There is "Analysis" screen in the Web A
Chinese instead of Simplified Chinese should be Traditional Chinese.
Jeanne
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Steven White wrote:
> Hi Everyone
>
> Per
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Language+Analysis#LanguageAnalysis-Language-SpecificFactories
> I see the languages Solr s
Right, when scoring any document that scores 0 is removed from the
results and facets etc. are calculated afterwards.
Best,
Erick
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Jamie Johnson wrote:
> Actually I should have just tried this before asking but I'll say what I'm
> seeing and maybe someone can con
Hi Jeanne,
I don't understand. Are you saying "Chinese Tokenizer" per
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Language+Analysis#LanguageAnalysis-Chinese
is "Traditional Chinese"? If so, then it "is deprecated as of Solr 3.4"
and I just tried it with Solr 5.2 and could not get Solr start
I'm doing some experimenting with Solr 5.3 and the 7.x-1.x-dev version of
the Apache Solr Search module for Drupal. Things seem to be working fine,
except that this warning message appears in the Solr admin logging window
and in the server log:
"no default request handler is registered (either '/s
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Right, when scoring any document that scores 0 is removed from the
> results
Just to clarify, I think Jamie removed 0 scoring documents himself.
Solr has never done this itself. Lucene used to a long time ago and
then stopped IIRC.
-Yoni
Thats... strange.
Looking at hte code it appears to be a totally bogus and missleading
warning -- but it also shouldn't affect anything.
You can feel free to ignore it for now...
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7984
: Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 15:10:18 -0400
: From: Scott Hollenbeck
On 8/27/2015 1:10 PM, Scott Hollenbeck wrote:
> I'm doing some experimenting with Solr 5.3 and the 7.x-1.x-dev version of
> the Apache Solr Search module for Drupal. Things seem to be working fine,
> except that this warning message appears in the Solr admin logging window
> and in the server log:
I just want to clarify: all of Shawn's points below are valid and good --
but they stll don't explain the warning messgae you are getting. it makes
no sense as the code is currently written, and doesn't do anything to help
encourage people to transition to path based handler names.
: Date:
Right, I am removing them myself. Another feature which would be great
would be the ability to specify a custom collector like the positive score
only collector in this case to avoid having to do an extra pass over all of
the scores, but I don't believe there is a way to do that now right?
On Thu
Hi Vijay,
I'm not sure what's wrong here ... have you posted to the Slider
mailing list? Also, which version of Java are you using when
interacting with Slider? I know it had some issues with Java 8 at one
point. Which version of Slider so I can try to reproduce ...
Cheers,
Tim
On Thu, Aug 27, 2
Tim,
Here is the complete content of the appConfig-default.json file. I haven’t
worked with Slider so far, so not very sure if some mistake has crept into this
file while modifying it as per the changes mentioned by Lucidworks on the
Github page. However, I tried to simulate the steps mentioned
36 matches
Mail list logo
