for #1, i don't use DIH, but is there any possibility of that column
having duplicate keys, with subsequent docs replacing existing ones?
and for #2, for some cases you could use a negative filterquery:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SimpleFacetParameters#Retrieve_docs_with_facets_missing
so instead of that "fq=-facetField:[* TO *]", something like
"fq=-car_make:Taurus". picking "negatives" might even make the UI a
bit easier.
anyway, just some thoughts. cheers,
rob
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Olson, Ron <rol...@lbpc.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the reply. As far as #1, my table that I'm indexing via DIH has a
> PK field, generated by a sequence, so there are records with ID of 1, 2, 3,
> etc. That same id is the one I use in my unique id field in the document
> (<uniqueKey>ID</uniqueID>).
>
> I've noticed that the table has, say, 10 rows. My index only has 8. I don't
> know why that is, but I'd like to figure out which records are missing and
> add them (and hopefully understand why they weren't added in the first
> place). I was just wondering if there was some way to compare the two as part
> of a sql query, but on reflection, it does seem like an absurd request, so I
> apologize; I think what I'll have to do is write a solrj program that gets
> every ID in the table, then does a search on that ID in the index, and add
> the ones that are missing.
>
> Regarding the second item, yes, it's crazy but I'm not sure what to do; there
> really are that many options and some searches will be extremely specific,
> yet broad enough in terms for this to be a problem.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 3:55 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Two unrelated questions
>
> for <1> I don't quite get what you're driving at. Your DIH
> query assigns the uniqueKey, it's not like it's something
> auto-generated. Perhaps a concrete example would
> help.
>
> <2> There's a limit you can adjust that defaults to
> 1024 (maxBooleanClauses in solrconfig.xml). You can
> bump this very high, but you're right, if anyone actually
> does something absurd it'll slow *that* query down. But
> just bumping this query higher won't change performance
> absent someone actually putting a ton of items in it...
>
> Best
> Erick
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Olson, Ron <rol...@lbpc.com> wrote:
>> Hi all-
>>
>> I'm not sure if I should break this out into two separate questions to the
>> list for searching purposes, or if one is more acceptable (don't want to
>> flood).
>>
>> I have two (hopefully) straightforward questions:
>>
>> 1. Is it possible to expose the unique ID of a document to a DIH query? The
>> reason I want to do this is because I use the unique ID of the row in the
>> table as the unique ID of the Lucene document, but I've noticed that the
>> counts of documents doesn't match the count in the table; I'd like to add
>> these rows and was hoping to avoid writing a custom SolrJ app to do it.
>>
>> 2. Is there any limit to the number of conditions in a Boolean search? We're
>> working on a new project where the user can choose either, for example,
>> "Ford Vehicles", in which case I can simply search for "Ford", but if the
>> user chooses specific makes and models, then I have to say something like
>> "Crown Vic OR Focus OR Taurus OR F-150", etc., where they could
>> theoretically choose every model of Ford ever made except one. This could
>> lead to a *very* large query, and was worried both that it was even
>> possible, but also the impact on performance.
>>
>>
>> Thanks, and I apologize if this really should be two separate messages.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>> DISCLAIMER: This electronic message, including any attachments, files or
>> documents, is intended only for the addressee and may contain CONFIDENTIAL,
>> PROPRIETARY or LEGALLY PRIVILEGED information. If you are not the intended
>> recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, disclosure, copying or
>> distribution of this message or any of the information included in or with
>> it is unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this
>> message in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and
>> permanently delete and destroy this message and its attachments, along with
>> any copies thereof. This message does not create any contractual obligation
>> on behalf of the sender or Law Bulletin Publishing Company.
>> Thank you.
>>
>
>
> DISCLAIMER: This electronic message, including any attachments, files or
> documents, is intended only for the addressee and may contain CONFIDENTIAL,
> PROPRIETARY or LEGALLY PRIVILEGED information. If you are not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, disclosure, copying or
> distribution of this message or any of the information included in or with it
> is unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this message
> in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and
> permanently delete and destroy this message and its attachments, along with
> any copies thereof. This message does not create any contractual obligation
> on behalf of the sender or Law Bulletin Publishing Company.
> Thank you.
>
