Christoph,
I'm wondering if the problem comes from the 'query type' parameter?
http://www.elasticsearch.org/blog/understanding-query-then-fetch-vs-dfs-query-then-fetch/
Have you tried dfs_query_then_fetch? Does it make any difference?
All the best,
Stéphane
--
You received this message
Hello Christoph,
Sorry but I won't be able to provide hints on this one. Hope you'll find
a solution
Stephane
On 06/26/2014 05:43 PM, Christoph Lingg wrote:
other unexpected results arise due to different queryNorms:
for the first result i get a query norm:
|
{
value: 0.0059806756,
Just for what itś worth: we have been using ES as our primary datastore for
almost 2 years. so far so good.
I think that the blog post you are referring to is *very* interesting *but*
at the same time, think about how many sql databases out there are not even
backed-up in production... are they
Hello Christoph,
Just wanted to add that it would be great if you could report back your
findings (good or bad) to the group. We're especially interested in this
because we're going to install Photon and would love it to work as fast as
possible ;)
Stéphane Bastian
--
You received this
I guess you already know this tool, but just in case you don't. I usually
use BigDesk: https://github.com/lukas-vlcek/bigdesk to check if there is
something wrong with Heap size or any metrics that it provides (cache size,
etc)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Thanks. I'm starting to get a better idea of the whole picture ;)
Could you also share the query you are running? do run the cross_field
query against the default field or the 'raw' field?
Stéphane Bastian
On 06/25/2014 05:07 PM, Christoph Lingg wrote:
Disabling sharding shouldn't
Out of curiosity, what kind of performance do you get when you only run
the search on '.raw' fields and not regular fields (with edgengram).
Obviously the result of the query will not be the same as before as the
whole world should match if the edgengram are out of the picture.
I had some
Hello,
It seems to me that the cross_field does more than the SOLR dismax query.
To compare the same thing in both ES and Solr, you could run the disMax
query with Es and start from there
==
http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/query-dsl-dis-max-query.html
