Hi,
I have a newbie question about the 'standard' requestHandler in
solrconfig.xml. What I like to know is where is the config information for
this requestHandler kept? When I go to http://localhost:8983/solr/admin, I
see the following info, but am curious where are the supposedly 'chained'
co
a look at the solrconfig.xml in the example directory
> (".../example/solr/conf/") for examples on how to set up the spellcheck
> component, and on how the request handlers are configured.
>
> -Jay
> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at
Hi,
I know Solr 1.4 is going to be released any day now pending Lucene 2.9
release. Is there anywhere where one can download a pre-released nighly
build of Solr 1.4 just for getting familiar with new features (e.g. field
collapsing)?
Thanks,
Michael
--
View this message in context:
http://www
Hi,
I have this situation that I believe is very common but was curious if
anyone knows the right way to go about solving it.
I have a document with 'ALMA awards' in it. However, when user searches for
'aLMA awards', it ends up with no results found. However, when I search for
'alma awards'
markrmiller wrote:
>
> michael8 wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I know Solr 1.4 is going to be released any day now pending Lucene 2.9
>> release. Is there anywhere where one can download a pre-released nighly
>> build of Solr 1.4 just for getting familiar with ne
markrmiller wrote:
>
> michael8 wrote:
>>
>> markrmiller wrote:
>>
>>> michael8 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I know Solr 1.4 is going to be released any day now pending Lucene 2.9
>>>> release.
Just looking for confirmation from others, but it appears that the formatting
of last_index_time from dataimport.properties (using DataImportHandler) is
different in 1.4 vs. that in 1.3. I was troubleshooting why delta imports
are no longer working for me after moving over to solr 1.4 (10/2 nighl
s to
DataImportHandler to specify the desired date/time format to use.
Michael
Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ्-2 wrote:
>
> really?
> I don't remember that being changed.
>
> what difference do u notice?
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 2:30 AM, michael8 wrote:
>>
&g
Thanks Shalin. Patch works well for me too.
Michael
Shalin Shekhar Mangar wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:38 AM, michael8 wrote:
>
>>
>> 2 things I noticed that are different from 1.3 to 1.4 for DataImport:
>>
>> 1. there are now 2 datetime values (pe
Hi,
Does anyone know when exactly is the dih.last_index_time in
dataimport.properties captured? E.g. start of issueing SQL to data source,
end of executing SQL to data source to fetch the list of IDs that have
changed since last index, end of indexing all changed/new documents? The
name seems t
:
>
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 1:42 AM, michael8 wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Does anyone know when exactly is the dih.last_index_time in
>> dataimport.properties captured? E.g. start of issueing SQL to data
>> source,
>> end of executing SQL to data s
That's perfect. Reimporting and reindexing some redundantly because of the
slight time overlap is worth the risk of losing docs. Thanks Shalin.
Michael
Shalin Shekhar Mangar wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 9:46 PM, michael8 wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks for
Hi,
I would like to confirm if 'adjacent' in collapse.type means the documents
(with the same collapse field value) are considered adjacent *after* the
'sort' param from the query has been applied, or *before*? I would think it
would be *after* since collapse feature primarily is meant for prese
Hi,
First I like to pardon my novice question on patching solr (1.4). What I
like to know is, given a patch, like the one for collapse field, how would
one go about knowing what solr source that patch is meant for since this is
a source level patch? Wouldn't the exact versions of a set of java
Hi,
First I like to pardon my novice question on patching solr (1.4). What I
like to know is, given a patch, like the one for collapse field, how would
one go about knowing what solr source that patch is meant for since this is
a source level patch? Wouldn't the exact versions of a set of java
nswers your question.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Martijn
>
> 2009/11/2 michael8 :
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to confirm if 'adjacent' in collapse.type means the
>> documents
>> (with the same collapse field value) are considered adjacent *after* the
>
y)
>
> now check out revision 772437 using the --revision switch in svn, patch
> away, and then svn up to make sure everything merges cleanly. This is a
> good guide to follow as well:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/solr-user@lucene.apache.org/msg10189.html
>
> cheers,
&g
)
Unless there is a better way, it seems like I would need to do "svn up
--revision ..." for each of the files to be patched and then apply the
patch? This seems error prone and tedious. Am I missing something simpler
here?
Michael
michael8 wrote:
>
> Perfect. This is wha
e-5.patch
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 7:48 PM, michael8 wrote:
>>
>> Hmmm, perhaps I jumped the gun. I just looked over the field collapse
>> patch
>> for SOLR-236 and each file listed in the patch has its own revision #.
>>
>> E.g. from field-col
Hi Julian,
Saw you post on exactly the question I have. I'm curious if you got any
response directly, or figured out a way to do this by now that you could
share? I'm in the same situation trying to 'sanitize' the query string
coming in before handing it to solr. I do see that characters like
throws error ( invalid field, too many clauses, etc )
> then I pass original query to DisMax request handler.
>
> Alex
>
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:05 PM, michael8 wrote:
>>
>> Hi Julian,
>>
>> Saw you post on exactly the question I have. I'm curious if
thing*
>> If you don't specify q.alt parameter then Solr returns zero results
>> for empty search. *:* won't work either.
>>
>> > though this syntax has helped me debug/monitor the state of my search
>> doc pool
>> size.
>> see q.alt
>>
Hi,
This almost seems like a bug, but I can't be sure so I'm seeking
confirmation. Basically I am building a site that presents search results
in reverse chronologically order. I am also leveraging the field collapse
feature so that I can group results using 'adjacent' mode and have solr
return
o increase of memory
> usage. OpenBitSet is memory wise more efficient then an ArrayList of
> integers. I think that this will only be a real problem when the
> collapse groups become very large.
>
> I hope this will answer your question.
>
> Martijn
>
> 2009/11/14 mich
I'm currently using Solr 1.4 with its built-in solr.ReplicationHandler
enabled in solrconfig.xml for a master and slave as follows:
${enable.master:false}
commit
startup
schema.xml,protwords.txt,spellings.txt,stopwords.txt,synonyms.txt
${enable.slav
Hi,
I'm puzzled by this issue and was wondering if anyone knows why. Basically
I am trying to get hit counts from my solr.log.* files for analysis purpose.
However, I noticed that sometimes for a request I don't get a "hits=xyz"
shown.
Here are 2 example log snippets from my solr.log.2010_01_
Update: from my further investigation, it appears that anytime I am using the
collapse field feature (I am running collapse field patch on 1.4), then the
hits= count is not shown in the log. Anyone can confirm?
michael8 wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I'm puzzled by this issue and was wonde
27 matches
Mail list logo
