Hi
In solr 6.2.1 as server and solr 6.2.0 for client
It's a 2 shards index, 3 replicas for each shard.
We are fetching the latest document with sorting over creationTime desc and
rows=1.
At the same time we are committing sanity tests that insert documents and
delete them immediately.
The weir
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 11:22 AM, moscovig wrote:
> Hi
> In solr 6.2.1 as server and solr 6.2.0 for client
> It's a 2 shards index, 3 replicas for each shard.
>
> We are fetching the latest document with sorting over creationTime desc and
> rows=1.
>
> At the same time we are committing sanity tes
Is there any change Real Time Get is getting confused since rows=1?
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 8:34 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 11:22 AM, moscovig wrote:
>> Hi
>> In solr 6.2.1 as server and solr 6.2.0 for client
>> It's a 2 shards index, 3 replicas for each shard.
>>
>> We ar
We are using Solr 5.1.0 and DIH to build index.
We are using DIH with clean=true and commit=true and optimize=true.
Currently retrieving about 10.5 million records in about an hour.
I will like to find from other member's experiences as to how long can DIH
run with no issues? What is the maximum
Hi all,
I am experiencing a weird behavior with Solr. Pagination gives duplicates
results.
Requesting
*http://localhost:8983/solr/tweets/select?q=text:test&start=0&wt=csv&fl=id,timestamp&fq=doc_type:tweet*
gives me:
id,timestamp
801943081268428800,2016-11-25T00:18:24.613Z
802159834942541824,201
start is an absolute row start parameter, not a page number. So, you
need to calculate the next page start yourself.
Regards,
Alex.
http://www.solr-start.com/ - Resources for Solr users, new and experienced
On 11 December 2016 at 22:52, atawfik wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am experiencing a w
Any help guys ...
On 09-Dec-2016 1:05 PM, "Kamal Kishore Aggarwal"
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am using solr 5.4.1. Here I am using dataimport handler to index data
> with SQL Server.
>
> I am using CLOB transformer to convert clob value to string. Indexing is
> working fine but clob transformation is no