You might have to use 5.3 when it is publicly available. It supports Basic
Auth. But based on my understanding for the authentication/authorization
framework implemented in 5.2, you need to use Solr Cloud/Zookeeper for
configuring the plugins.
Noble, Anshum or Ishan can confirm it. They are origin
Hello Jamie,
I don't understand how it could choose DocValuesFacets (it occurs on
docValues=true) field, but then switches to UninvertingReader/FieldCache
which means docValues=false. If you can provide more details it would be
great.
Beside of that, I suppose you can only implement and inject your
Solr is the popular, blazing fast, open source NoSQL search platform
from the Apache Lucene project. Its major features include powerful
full-text search, hit highlighting, faceted search, dynamic
clustering, database integration, rich document (e.g., Word, PDF)
handling, and geospatial search. Sol
sorry , screwed up the title
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Noble Paul wrote:
> Solr is the popular, blazing fast, open source NoSQL search platform
> from the Apache Lucene project. Its major features include powerful
> full-text search, hit highlighting, faceted search, dynamic
> clustering,
Solr is the popular, blazing fast, open source NoSQL search platform
from the Apache Lucene project. Its major features include powerful
full-text search, hit highlighting, faceted search, dynamic
clustering, database integration, rich document (e.g., Word, PDF)
handling, and geospatial search. Sol
Getting the most recent doc first in the case of a tie
will _not_ "just happen". I don't think you really get the
nuance here...
You index doc1, and doc2 later. Let's
claim that doc1 gets internal Lucene doc ID of 1 and
doc2 gets an internal doc ID of 2. So far you're golden.
Let's further claim t
Well, It Depends (tm). I've certainly seen response times on that order, it all
revolves around the complexity of the queries, how much faceting you're
doing, all that kind of thing.
If always specifying cache=false works for you, go for it. The only caution I
would add is that randomly generating
Is there a way to append a set of words the the out-of-box solr index when
using the spellcheck / suggestions feature?
Thank you Upayavira for your reply.
Would like to confirm, when I set rows=100, does it mean that it only build
the cluster based on the first 100 records that are returned by the search,
and if I have 1000 records that matches the search, all the remaining 900
records will not be considered for c
What is reported in the Solr log? That's usually much more informative.
Best,
Erick
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch
wrote:
> It should work (at first glance). copyField does support wildcards.
>
> Do you have a field called "text"? Also, your field name and field
> type "t
no.
Most of it is in Solr 5.3
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Steven White wrote:
> Hi Noble,
>
> Is everything in the link you provided applicable to Solr 5.2.1?
>
> Thanks
>
> Steve
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Noble Paul wrote:
>
>> did you manage to look at the reference guide?
>>
as mentioned in a previous email I have a need to provide security controls
at the term level. I know that Lucene/Solr doesn't support this so I had
baked something onto a 4.x baseline that was sufficient for my use cases.
I am now looking to move that implementation to 5.x and am running into an
It should work (at first glance). copyField does support wildcards.
Do you have a field called "text"? Also, your field name and field
type "text" have the same name. Not sure it is the best idea.
Regards,
Alex.
Solr Analyzers, Tokenizers, Filters, URPs and even a newsletter:
http://www.s
yes, re-indexed after changing the schema
select?q=*:*&wt=json&debugQuery=true&indent=true&rows=0&fq=date%3A%5B2013-08-17T00%3A00%3A00Z+TO+2015-08-17T00%3A00%3A00Z%5D&json.facet={facet1:{range:{end:'NOW/DAY',facet:{namefacet:{terms:{facet:{facet2:{terms:{facet:{sum:"sum(amount)"},field:city,minco
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 6:33 PM, naga sharathrayapati
wrote:
> In order to improve the query time of nested faceting query (json facet
> api), have used 'docValues' in the schema,optimized index and increased
> cache sizes(no evictions)
>
> I still cannot be bring the query time to less than 1 sec
On 8/24/2015 4:33 PM, naga sharathrayapati wrote:
> In order to improve the query time of nested faceting query (json facet
> api), have used 'docValues' in the schema,optimized index and increased
> cache sizes(no evictions)
>
> I still cannot be bring the query time to less than 1 sec.
>
> is the
In order to improve the query time of nested faceting query (json facet
api), have used 'docValues' in the schema,optimized index and increased
cache sizes(no evictions)
I still cannot be bring the query time to less than 1 sec.
is there anything that i can do that can improve the performance?
Bosco,
We use CAS for user authentication, not sure if we have Kerberos working
anywhere. Also we are not using ZooKeeper, because we are only running one
server currently.
thanks
Tom LeZotte
Health I.T. - Senior Product Developer
(p) 615-875-8830
On Aug 24, 2015, at 3:12 PM, Don Bosco D
BTW, google revealed that there is a 3rd-party Scala library for async
calls which could be usable from Java.
I have not tried it myself though
https://github.com/inoio/solrs
On 24 August 2015 at 21:35, Arcadius Ahouansou wrote:
> Hi Ashish.
>
> The Apache HttpAsyncClient uses Java Future to wr
For my project, Keberos is not a requirement. What I need is:
1) Basic Auth to Solr server (at all access levels)
2) SSL support
My setup is not using ZK, it's a single core.
Steve
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Don Bosco Durai wrote:
> Just curious, is Kerberos an option for you? If so, m
Hi All,
Is it possible to use copyField with dynamicField? I was trying to do
the following,
and getting a 400 error on trying to copy the first dynamic field.
Without the copyField the fields seem to load ok.
--
Zach Thompson
z...@duckduckgo.com
Hi Ashish.
The Apache HttpAsyncClient uses Java Future to wrap a synchronous call into
asyn
The above ticket does similar thing by wrapping a SolrJ call into Future
Feel free to submit any proposal you may have to the dev list.
Arcadius
On 24 August 2015 at 07:20, Ashish Mukherjee
wrote:
> Th
Just curious, is Kerberos an option for you? If so, mostly all your 3 use
cases will addressed.
Bosco
On 8/24/15, 12:18 PM, "Steven White" wrote:
>Hi Noble,
>
>Is everything in the link you provided applicable to Solr 5.2.1?
>
>Thanks
>
>Steve
>
>On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Noble Paul wr
Hi Erick,
The earlier test was done through individual requests. However, my load test
is even better.
(1) load test (3 requests/per second/per core) immediately after restarting
Solr: average response time: 122 ms
(2) load test (5 requests/per second/per core) immediately after restarting
Solr:
Weird fq caching bug when using timeAllowed
Find a pwid (in this case YLGVQ)
Run a query w/ a FQ on the pwid and timeAllowed=1.
http://hgsolr2devsl.healthgrades.com:8983/solr/providersearch/select/?q=*:*&wt=json&fl=pwid&fq=pwid:YLGVQ&timeAllowed=1
Ensure #2 returns 0 results
Rerun the query wi
The release is underway. Incorporating some corrections suggested by
others. Expect an announcement ove rthe next few hours
On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Arcadius Ahouansou
wrote:
> Solr-5.3 has been available for download from
> http://mirror.catn.com/pub/apache/lucene/solr/5.3.0/
>
> The red
These look like requirements for a generic Solr search, maybe with
focus on proximity and/or phrase matching. Perhaps some white-listing
filter if you have a fixed set of words you care about. E.g. with
KeepWordFilter in the analyzer chain.
http://www.solr-start.com/info/analyzers/#KeepWordFilterFa
Hi Noble,
Is everything in the link you provided applicable to Solr 5.2.1?
Thanks
Steve
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Noble Paul wrote:
> did you manage to look at the reference guide?
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Securing+Solr
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 9:23 PM, LeZ
Thanks Hoss.
I understand the dynamic nature of doc-IDs. All that I care about is the
most recent docs be at the top of the hit list when there is a tie. From
your reply, it is not clear if that's what happens. If not, then I have to
sort, but this is something I want to avoid so it won't add c
Thanks Erick,
I will explain the detail scenario so you might give me a solution:
I want to annotate a medical document base on only medical dictionary. I
don't need to annotate non medical words of document at all.
The medical dictionary contains terms which contains multiple words, and
these term
did you manage to look at the reference guide?
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Securing+Solr
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 9:23 PM, LeZotte, Tom
wrote:
> Alex
> I got a super secret release of Solr 5.3.1, wasn’t suppose to say anything.
>
> Yes I’m running 5.2.1, I will check out the r
: A follow up question. Is the sub-sorting on the lucene internal doc IDs
: ascending or descending order? That is, do the most recently index doc
you can not make any generic assumptions baout hte order of the internal
lucene doc IDS -- the secondary sort on the internal IDs is stable (and
F
A follow up question. Is the sub-sorting on the lucene internal doc IDs
ascending or descending order? That is, do the most recently index doc
show up first in this set of docs that have tied score? If not, who can I
have the most recent be first? Do I have to sort on lucene's internal doc
IDs?
I ran into another issue that I am having issue running to ground. My
implementation on Solr 4.x worked as I expected but trying to migrate this
to Solr 5.x it looks like some of the faceting is delegated to
DocValuesFacets which ultimately caches things at a field level in the
FieldCache.DEFAULT
: Can you please explain how having the same field for query and stat can
: cause some issue for my better understanding of this feature?
I don't know if it can, it probably shouldn't, but in terms of trying ot
udnerstand the bug and reproduce it, any pertinant facts may be relivant -
particula
Thanks a lot !!
Pegazus
[@@ THALES GROUP INTERNAL @@]
De : Erick Erickson [via Lucene]
[mailto:ml-node+s472066n422494...@n3.nabble.com]
Envoyé : lundi 24 août 2015 17:59
À : KLAUSZ Yoann
Objet : Re: Retreive new inserted data !
This is what the real time get handler is all about, see:
https://
bq: As a follow up, the default is set to "NRTCachingDirectoryFactory"
for DirectoryFactory but not MMapDirectory. It is mentioned that
NRTCachingDirectoryFactory "caches small files in memory for better
NRT performance".
NRTCachingDirectoryFactory also uses MMapDirectory under the covers as
well
This is what the real time get handler is all about, see:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/RealTime+Get
Best,
Erick
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Pegazus wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to now if it is possible to retreive added document not yet
> flush in hard disk.
>
> I h
On 8/24/2015 12:48 AM, Pavel Hladik wrote:
> we have a Solr 5.2.1 with 9 cores and one of them has 140M docs. Can you
> please recommend tuning of those GC parameters? The performance is not a
> issue, sometimes during peaks we have OOM and we use 50G of heap memory, the
> server has 64G of ram.
>
This feels a little like an XY problem, from Hossman's apache page:
Your question appears to be an "XY Problem" ... that is: you are dealing
with "X", you are assuming "Y" will help you, and you are asking about "Y"
without giving more details about the "X" so that we can understand the
full issue
Alex
I got a super secret release of Solr 5.3.1, wasn’t suppose to say anything.
Yes I’m running 5.2.1, I will check out the release notes for 5.3.
Was looking for three types of user authentication, I guess.
1. the Admin Console
2. User auth for each Core ( and select and update) on a server.
3.
bq: Does that make sense?
In a word, yes. Without {!cache=false}, each and
every document in the entire corpus is examined
and a bitset constructed that represents that
result set, then the entry in the filter cache is
constructed.
With cache=false, only docs that make it through the
rest of the
Hi All,
I am working on improving query performance of queries that is based on 15 M
records, and all the queries have a list of about 6 filter queries with
grouping and faceting requirements.
So far, I found that the cache setting in solrconfig.xml is helpful after
the Solr server is warmed up.
Thanks Ahmet.
Steve
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Ahmet Arslan
wrote:
> Hi Steven,
>
> When scores produce a tie, internal Lucene document IDs are used to break
> it.
> However, internal Lucene Ids can change when index changes. (merges,
> updates etc).
>
> You can see those values with [do
I used this to exclude files from folders of templatedata. But it still
couldnt remove these files from indexing
When I save the value of this expression in temp variable, all files in
templatedata have value true but still they are not skipped to index.
--
View this messag
Hi all,
I would like to now if it is possible to retreive added document not yet
flush in hard disk.
I have my case here:
I insert two document in solr and just after this insert i try to retrieve
them.
Three result possible :
- Success to retrieve those two documents.
- Retrieve only one.
- No
I need to find a solution to index my documents base on a dictionary. This
dictionary contains 3 million phrases. I have one big challenge and that is:
I need to index document base on this dictionary only with a consideration
that words permutation is also accepted.
For example : I have a phrase i
Thanks for the email from the future. It is good to start to prepare
for 5.3.1 now that 5.3 is nearly out.
Joking aside (and assuming Solr 5.2.1), what exactly are you trying to
achieve? Solr should not actually be exposed to the users directly. It
should be hiding in a backend only visible to you
Hi Steven,
Here is the relevant Jira ticket :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6057
Ahmet
On Monday, August 24, 2015 5:09 PM, Ahmet Arslan
wrote:
Hi Steven,
When scores produce a tie, internal Lucene document IDs are used to break it.
However, internal Lucene Ids can change when
Hi Steven,
When scores produce a tie, internal Lucene document IDs are used to break it.
However, internal Lucene Ids can change when index changes. (merges, updates
etc).
You can see those values with [docid] - DocIdAugmenterFactory.
If you want 100% stable sorting, use a second sorting criter
Hi Solr Community
I have been trying to add user authentication to our Solr 5.3.1 RedHat install.
I’ve found some examples on user authentication on the Jetty side. But they
have failed.
Does any one have a step by step example on authentication for the admin
screen? And a core?
Thanks
Tom
Hi Everyone,
When I search for a term in Solr, and it happens that 10 doc end up with
the same score, what's the order of doc ranking in the set of those 10
equally scored doc and what is it based on? Is there a link I can read
more about this?
Thanks,
Steve
On Mon, 2015-08-24 at 03:17 -0700, Pavel Hladik wrote:
> It seems that most elements are really on 31G, but can we say that Solr
> application is used like a number of elements from this result?
Fortunately Solr uses a lot of bit packing, which often translates to
arrays of longs, which take up th
We use grouping, so will try collapsing. Thank you for ideas!
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-4-10-3-cached-grouping-results-but-Solr-5-2-1-don-t-why-tp4224396p4224857.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Very interesting, never heard about that. We tested on our x64 linux with
java 1.8.0_51 and result is:
java -jar -Xms31g -Xmx31g -Xmn50m memory.jar
Total Memory (in bytes): 33279705088
Free Memory (in bytes): 33277314136
Max Memory (in bytes): 33279705088
Elements created and added to LinkedList:
i have autogenerated uuid for each document in solr. it is not marked as
uniquefield. i add
uuid
in config to generate uuid when i add document from client. But now
each time i update document uuid is changed.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.47
I honestly suspect your performance issue is down to the number of terms
you are passing into the clustering algorithm, not to memory usage as
such. If you have *huge* documents and cluster across them, performance
will be slower, by definition.
Clustering is usually done offline, for example on a
As a follow up, the default is set to "NRTCachingDirectoryFactory" for
DirectoryFactory but not MMapDirectory. It is mentioned that
NRTCachingDirectoryFactory "caches small files in memory for better NRT
performance".
Wondering if the this would also consume physical memory to the amount
of M
One other item to check is non heap memory usage. This can be monitored
from admin page.
On 8/23/15 11:48 PM, Pavel Hladik wrote:
Hi,
we have a Solr 5.2.1 with 9 cores and one of them has 140M docs. Can you
please recommend tuning of those GC parameters? The performance is not a
issue, sometim
Are you grouping or collapsing? Look at the {!collapse} post filter and
the associated ExpandComponent, which may give you a similar outcome
(depending upon what you are trying to achieve) but with better
performance.
Upayavira
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015, at 07:42 AM, Pavel Hladik wrote:
> Nobody knows
On Sun, 2015-08-23 at 23:48 -0700, Pavel Hladik wrote:
> we have a Solr 5.2.1 with 9 cores and one of them has 140M docs. Can you
> please recommend tuning of those GC parameters? The performance is not a
> issue, sometimes during peaks we have OOM and we use 50G of heap memory, the
> server has 64
On sorting fields we have:
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/GC-parameters-tuning-for-core-of-140M-docs-on-50G-of-heap-memory-tp4224813p4224820.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Do you have docValues on for your fields?
On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Pavel Hladik
wrote:
> Hi,
> we have a Solr 5.2.1 with 9 cores and one of them has 140M docs. Can you
> please recommend tuning of those GC parameters? The performance is not a
> issue, sometimes during peaks we have OOM a
63 matches
Mail list logo