Sorry to not respond for a week, it got busy here. Here are the URL params for one request:
qt=simple facet=true facet.limit=-1 facet.mincount=3 q=type:group AND qt_all:IsCriticallyAcclaimed AND qt_all:InGenreComedy facet.field=qt_toddscoregenres facet.field=qt_genres facet.field=qt_moods [and so on for quite a few more fields] I don't see any facet-specific stuff in solrconfig.xml. wunder On 4/14/09 7:57 PM, "Grant Ingersoll" <gsing...@apache.org> wrote: > OK, I guess details on the new faceting stuff would be in order. > Which faceting are using? Are you sure that it never occurred before > (i.e. it slipped under the radar)? > > Obviously, the key is reproducibility here, but this has all the > earmarks of some weird threading issue, it seems, at least IMO. > > > On Apr 14, 2009, at 5:32 PM, Walter Underwood wrote: > >> I already ruled out cosmic rays. It has happened on different >> hardware and at different times of day, including low load. >> >> The only thing associated with it is load from a new faceted >> browse thing we turned on. >> >> wunder >> >> On 4/14/09 2:23 PM, "Grant Ingersoll" <gsing...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Is bad memory a possibility? i.e. is it the same machine all the >>> time? Is there any recognizable pattern for when it happens? >>> >>> -Grant (grasping at straws) >>> >>> >>> On Apr 14, 2009, at 2:51 PM, Walter Underwood wrote: >>> >>>> Nope. This is a slave, so no indexing happens, just a sync. The >>>> sync happens once per day. It went bad at a different time. >>>> >>>> wunder >>>> >>>> On 4/14/09 11:42 AM, "Grant Ingersoll" <gsing...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Are there changes occuring when it goes bad that maybe aren't >>>>> committed? >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 14, 2009, at 1:59 PM, Walter Underwood wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> But why would it work for a few days, then go bad and stay bad? >>>>>> >>>>>> It fails for every multi-term query, even those not in cache. >>>>>> I ran a test with more queries than the cache size. >>>>>> >>>>>> We do use autowarming. >>>>>> >>>>>> wunder >>>>>> >>>>>> On 4/14/09 10:55 AM, "Yonik Seeley" <yo...@lucidimagination.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Walter Underwood >>>>>>> <wunderw...@netflix.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> The JaroWinkler equals was broken, but I fixed that a month ago. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Query cache sounds possible, but those are cleared on a commit, >>>>>>>> right? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, but if you use autowarming, those items are regenerated >>>>>>> and if >>>>>>> there is a problem with equals() then it could re-appear (the >>>>>>> cache >>>>>>> items are correct, it's just the lookup that returns the wrong >>>>>>> one). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Yonik >>>>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------- >>>>> Grant Ingersoll >>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com/ >>>>> >>>>> Search the Lucene ecosystem (Lucene/Solr/Nutch/Mahout/Tika/Droids) >>>>> using Solr/Lucene: >>>>> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -------------------------- >>> Grant Ingersoll >>> http://www.lucidimagination.com/ >>> >>> Search the Lucene ecosystem (Lucene/Solr/Nutch/Mahout/Tika/Droids) >>> using Solr/Lucene: >>> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search >>> >> > > -------------------------- > Grant Ingersoll > http://www.lucidimagination.com/ > > Search the Lucene ecosystem (Lucene/Solr/Nutch/Mahout/Tika/Droids) > using Solr/Lucene: > http://www.lucidimagination.com/search >
