It appears the 1.4.1 version was deployed with a new maven groupId
For eample, if you are trying to download solr-core, here are the differences
between 1.4.0 and 1.4.1.
1.4.0
groupId: org.apache.solr
artifactId: solr-core
1.4.1
groupId: org.apache.solr.solr
artifactId:solr-core
Was this cha
The solr docs say it is RESTful, yet it seems that it doesn't use http headers
in a RESTful way. For example, it doesn't seem to use the Accept: request
header to determine the media-type to be returned. Instead, it requires a
query parameter to be used in the URL. Also, it doesn't seem to us
I would like to the URLDataSource to make RESTful calls to get content and only
re-index when content changes. This means using http headers to make a request
and using the response headers to determine when to make the request. For
example,
Request Headers:
Accept: application/xml
if-modifi
ssage-
From: Don Werve [mailto:d...@madwombat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 9:40 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: REST calls
2010/6/27 Jason Chaffee
> The solr docs say it is RESTful, yet it seems that it doesn't use http
> headers in a RESTful way. For exam
In that case, being able to use Accept headers and conditional GET's
would make them more powerful and easier to use. The Accept header
could be used, if present, otherwise use the query parameter. Or, vice
versa. Also, conditional GET's are a big win when you know the data and
results are not c
Two more jaxrs solutions:
http://www.jboss.org/resteasy
http://cxf.apache.org/docs/jax-rs.html
However, I am not suggesting changing the core implementation. Just want to
make it more powerful by utilizing headers. I can accept the other issues that
have been mentioned as not RESTful.
Al
with the last-modified and etag headers.
Erik
On Jun 30, 2010, at 7:52 PM, Jason Chaffee wrote:
> In that case, being able to use Accept headers and conditional GET's
> would make them more powerful and easier to use. The Accept header
> could be used, if present, othe
I am getting the following error with the DataImport and I am not sure why as I
following the documentation. I am trying to use XPath and the URLDataSource
but it fails to load the datasource.
SEVERE: Full Import failed
org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImportHandlerException: No dataSourc
Is it possible to return multivalued files in the result?
I would like to have a multivalued field that is stored and not indexed (I also
copy the same field into another field where it is tokenized and indexed). I
would then like all the values of this field returned in the result set. Is
alued fields in result
Yes, you'll get what is stored and asked for.
-Original message-----
From: Jason Chaffee
Sent: Sat 11-09-2010 05:27
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org;
Subject: multivalued fields in result
Is it possible to return multivalued files in the result?
I would like
ds like you didn't
> really declare your field multivalued="true" on the face of things.
>
> But if it is multivalued AND you changed it, did you reindex after
> you changed the schema?
>
> Best
> Erick
>
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 4:21 AM, Jason Ch
Is it possible to use the same type of property configuration in
dataconfig.xml as is possible in solrconfig.xml?
I tried it and it didn't seem to work. For example,
${solr.data.dir:/opt/search/store/solr/data}
And in the dataconfig.xml, I would like to do this to configure the
baseUrl
I am using dismax and trying to use q=*:* to return all indexed
documents. However, it is always returning 0 found.
If I used the default select (not dismax) handler and try q=*:* then it
returns all documents.
There is nothing in the logs to indicate why this happening.
Does anyone
er to use *:* when the query
is
empty, so that you can still get back a full result set if you need it,
say
for faceting.
HTH
Mark
On May 7, 2011 9:22 AM, "Jason Chaffee" wrote:
> I am using dismax and trying to use q=*:* to return all indexed
> documents. However, it is alw
Fri 5/6/2011 7:34 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: *:* query with dismax
it does seem a little weird, but q.alt will get what you want:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DisMaxQParserPlugin#q.alt
hth,
rc
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 7:41 PM, Jason Chaffee wrote:
> Can you shed so
I am migrating from lucene to solr and I am not quite sure how do what I
need to.
I need to do a search that will search 3 different fields and combine
the results. First, it needs to not break the phrase into tokens, but
rather treat it is a phrase for one field. The other fields need to be
Is it possible to do query elevation based on field?
Basically, I would like to search the same term on three different
fields:
q=field1:term OR field2:term OR field3:term
and I would like to sort the results by fourth field
sort=field4+asc
However, I would like to elevate all
I would like to either disable fieldNorm in the scoring or make sure that it is
the same for all documents. I am creating EdgeNGrams and that can cause the
number of terms for a document to be variable, but I do not want it do affect
the scoring for this field. Is there an easy way to do this?
I am using dismax and I have configured to search 3 different fields
with one field getting an extra boost so that I the results of that
field are at the top of result set. Then, I sort the results by another
field to get the ordering.
My problem is that the scores are being skewed by the addi
27;
Subject: RE: How to use dismax and boosting properly?
Try setting the boost to 0 for the fields you don't want to contribute
to the score.
Kallin Nagelberg
-Original Message-
From: Jason Chaffee [mailto:jchaf...@ebates.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 4:03 PM
To: solr-us
I have the following configured for a particular field:
I am using dismax and querying multiple fields and I expect the query to
be parsed different for each field. For some reason, it is not kept as
single token for this field's query. For example, t
Thanks, didn't realize that.
On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:04 PM, "Ahmet Arslan" wrote:
> I have the following configured for a
> particular field:
>
>
>
>
>
> class="solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory" />
>
> class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory" />
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I am using
I am curious as to why the query parser does any tokenizing? I would
think you would want control/configure this with your analyzers?
Does anyone know the answer to this. Is there a performance gain or
something?
Thanks,
Jason
On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:04 PM, "Ahmet Arslan" wrote:
> I hav
wn analyzer.
Tommy Chheng
Programmer and UC Irvine Graduate Student
Twitter @tommychheng
http://tommy.chheng.com
On 3/25/10 7:37 PM, Jason Chaffee wrote:
> I am curious as to why the query parser does any tokenizing? I would
> think you would want control/configure this with your analyzers?
&g
I tried escaping the whitespace, but no avail. It is still be broken into two
tokens and the whitespace. Has anyone else tried this?
-Original Message-
From: Ahmet Arslan [mailto:iori...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 4:05 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: keyw
Got it working, there was a typo.
-Original Message-
From: Jason Chaffee [mailto:jchaf...@ebates.com]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 1:05 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: keyword query tokenizer
I tried escaping the whitespace, but no avail. It is still be broken into two
Ahh, but that is exactly what I don't want the DisjunctionMaxQuery to
do. I do not max scoring field per "word". Instead, I want it per
"phrase" which may be a single word or multiple words.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org]
Sent: Friday, March
I didn't know the quotes would work. I thought it had to be escaped and
I wasn't too fond of that because you have to unescape in the analysis
phase. Using quotes doesn't seem so bad to me.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org]
Sent: Monday, March 29
Is it possible to give a negative in boost in dismax? For instance,
field1^3 field2^0 field3^-0.1
Thanks,
Jason
ost" means "boost under 1"
(and probably elsewhere)
paul
PS: take the log and you get this negative.
Le 29-mars-10 à 21:08, Jason Chaffee a écrit :
> Is it possible to give a negative in boost in dismax? For instance,
>
>
>
> field1^3 field2^0 field3^-0.1
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Jason
>
I understand that it defeats the reason for dismax, at least the
original reason for dismax. However, if I can do it this way without
having to write my own handler because I need to search multiple fields
and combine the results, then it is still preferable and thus another
way to leverage disma
I think the key was change the tie to 0. I had it at 0.1. Getting
exactly what I want now.
Big thanks for the help.
-Original Message-
From: Jason Chaffee [mailto:jchaf...@ebates.com]
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 5:20 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: negative boost
I
Netflix search is built with Solr. That seems like a fairly big and
recognizable company.
-Original Message-
From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 11:44 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Evangelism
This is a Lucene story, but
Forgot the link.
http://www.lucidimagination.com/Community/Marketplace/Application-Showca
se-Wiki/Netflix
-Original Message-
From: Jason Chaffee [mailto:jchaf...@ebates.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 11:52 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Evangelism
Netflix search
34 matches
Mail list logo
