id:A id:B id:C id:D
*usually* works, but I have seen D appear first in the results for
certain queries.
Is there a query I can do or a better way to accomplish this?
It's a bit of a hack, but you could use boosts to order the docs:
id:A^4 id:B^3 id:C^2 id:D^1
Gorgeous! Does the job admirabl
On 3/7/07, Brian Whitman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have a non-Solr API that comes back with an ordered list of Solr
unique IDs -- it's SQL sort on user votes for Solr docs.
I would like to quickly retrieve those Solr documents in the order
specified by the other API and run it through the xsl
Mike Klaas wrote:
>
>
> Using the latest solr trunk, the error I reproduced before seems fixed
> (see below). Note that if you are using term vectors with
> highlighting, you'll have to reindex.
>
> org.apache.solr.analysis.SynonymFilterFactory {expand=true,
> ignoreCase=true, synonyms=synony
I have a non-Solr API that comes back with an ordered list of Solr
unique IDs -- it's SQL sort on user votes for Solr docs.
I would like to quickly retrieve those Solr documents in the order
specified by the other API and run it through the xslt response writer.
What sort of query can I do
Selecting by type will do the job. But I suppose it sacrifice
performance because having multiple document types in the same
index will render a larger index. Is it bad?
--
Best regards,
Jack
Wednesday, March 7, 2007, 2:15:14 PM, you wrote:
> As it is now... I don't think so. SolrCore is a sta
On 3/7/07, nick19701 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
About this synonym filter fix:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-167
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-167
I tried today's solr build. It seems the verbose analysis of the index
analyzer still has the same symptom.
should I try ano
About this synonym filter fix:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-167
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-167
I tried today's solr build. It seems the verbose analysis of the index
analyzer still has the same symptom.
should I try another build? Or maybe my tomcat is not using the l
Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
>
> patches for issues can't be applied until someone who cares about them
> write them and contribute them for committers to consider/apply :)
>
>
it seems I'm one of the very few people who care about this feature :)
Unfortunately my daily languages are c++ and c#
: The suggested fix from Mirko seems very simple. Hopefull a patch will be
: applied
: very soon. In the meantime, I'll use my backup solution:
patches for issues can't be applied until someone who cares about them
write them and contribute them for committers to consider/apply :)
-Hoss
: I wanted to add data from relational database tables.
: To avoid defining each and every table column name in the schema, I thought
: I'll append a suffix to the field name depending on it's type.
which is fine and dandy for when you index the data, mapping your "string"
database column "user",
Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
>
> It is tracked in http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-42
>
> ...there are currently no patches.
>
>
The suggested fix from Mirko seems very simple. Hopefull a patch will be
applied
very soon. In the meantime, I'll use my backup solution:
http://fucoder.co
Thanks Ryan for your insight. I do not wish to change Solr.
Although it seems weird, just adding a "type" field makes it possible
I'm not working with a DB but since we are indexing a huge vault of XML
documents, I use Hadoop + Lucene for indexing which finally generates N
number of partitions,
Yes, I'm implementing federated search. I do have N partitions of indexes
built and I'd like to have mutiple Solr instances in a cluster each serving
atleast 2 partitions. I was wondering if I could somehow find a way to make
Solr work with atleast 2 partitions. It looks like I need to have smalle
As it is now... I don't think so. SolrCore is a static singleton
class -- without some serious reworking, i think there is only one
instance per jvm.
I think getting rid of the static singleton should go on the long term
TODO list, but that doesn't help you now.
Although it seems weird, just ad
Venkatesh,
Are you perhapes talking about Federated Searching (
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FederatedSearch). I am new to Solr but this was
a feature I was looking far as well. I do not think its built into Solr at
the momment.
Regards,
Brad
On 3/7/07, Venkatesh Seetharam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
It's about an analyzer. Maybe you are using a wrong analyzer which cuts
out characters like "/" or even digits. Try to change default analyzer
to something different or custom.
Cyril Furtado wrote:
I am indexing a field called location which is the directory value like
/f1/ccde/bpc
When I
Thanks Ryan for your inputs. If I'm not using Solr webapp but wrapping Solr
in plain Java, is there any way that I could get Solr to work with multiple
index partitions?
Venkatesh
On 3/7/07, Ryan McKinley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Solr looks at one index - If you want to look at multiple inde
I wanted to add data from relational database tables.
To avoid defining each and every table column name in the schema, I thought
I'll append a suffix to the field name depending on it's type.
Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
>
> sorry, i'm really not following this talk of "stripping" the dynamic fi
Solr looks at one index - If you want to look at multiple indexes, you
need multiple solr instances running. Check the wiki for how to set
that up:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrJetty
(the resin and tomcat pages have something similar)
On 3/7/07, Venkatesh Seetharam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
Hello there,
Howdy. I was wondering if there is a way to configure one Solr instance to
search multiple Index partitions? I read the wiki and found the entry in
SolrConfig.xml:
/var/data/solr
Can I have mutiple directories? Comma separated?
Any help is greatly appreciated.
--
Thanks,
Venkates
On 3/7/07, Andrew Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Argh! Thanks Yonik for pointing out the log files, duh! I had a
malformed line in my schema.xml. Nice feature to add down the line,
although I know there is a lot of work going into the admin interface so
who knows if it is already thought of.
Is anyone running Solr on Tomcat 6.0.10? Any issues?
I searched the archives and didn't see anything.
wunder
--
Walter Underwood
Search Guru, Netflix
Thanks for the good advice.
ryan mckinley wrote:
>
> MySQL has a TIMESTAMP field that can autoupdate everytime something
> changes... i've never used it, but that may be a place to look.
>
> alternativly you could add a TRIGGER to automatticaly dump stuff to a
> bucket when it changes and c
: like software
:
: and standerd xml writers have xml generated as the same start and end tags.
:
: in SOLR xml
: start tag =
: end tag =
that "tag" is the same, the "tag" is "field" ... the field "tag" has a
mandatory "attribute" which is "name"
While it's certianly true that some people disc
Argh! Thanks Yonik for pointing out the log files, duh! I had a
malformed line in my schema.xml. Nice feature to add down the line,
although I know there is a lot of work going into the admin interface so
who knows if it is already thought of. Schema Debugger? Maybe one day
I will dig into
That would work in the facet query, but it implies using truncation in
the facet.field too, doesn't it? (Assuming you want to group the
higher-level facets like "Dir1" rather than getting all the possible
paths beginning with "Dir1").
I had assumed I'd have to do something like this:
Dir1
Dir1/S
On Mar 7, 2007, at 11:34 AM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
: back in just now. Here's an example trying to warm using a sort on
: field name "subject". I tried query of
: "allMessageContent:trying;subject+asc" as well as
: "allMessageContent:trying;subject" (without "+asc") - either way
when expressin
I am indexing a field called location which is the directory value like
/f1/ccde/bpc
When I search for /f* it return empty
When I search for f* it returns matching values
If I search for f1* again it return empty (this happens with number
followed by *)
If I search for /* it returns empty
I
I had a problem like that when I blew away an index by deleting the
index directory instead of its parent the data directory; it seemed that
if Solr saw the data directory, it assumed the index was there. Removing
the data directory and letting Solr create it seemed to fix the problem.
(Or maybe so
On 3/7/07, Andrew Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello, I am trying to install another copy of solr on a server. I have
done this many times before, but am running into errors now and I am not
sure what is causing them.
I unzipped a copy of 1.1.0 and placed the .war file into tomcat. Then I
c
Hello, I am trying to install another copy of solr on a server. I have
done this many times before, but am running into errors now and I am not
sure what is causing them.
I unzipped a copy of 1.1.0 and placed the .war file into tomcat. Then I
created the solr directory with my bin, data, con
hai,
Yes the Xml formats is understood but there is an issue to generate these
xmls
from a data source. These XML feild tags doesnot contain the same start
tags and end tags.
like software
and standerd xml writers have xml generated as the same start and end tags.
in SOLR xml
start tag =
end t
On Mar 7, 2007, at 2:17 PM, Mike Klaas wrote:
On 3/7/07, mark angelillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I've got a Solr index running and I want to use a dynamicField to
store n different sorting fields. The field that is used to actually
sort the results will be determined by the applicatio
On 3/7/07, mark angelillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I've got a Solr index running and I want to use a dynamicField to
store n different sorting fields. The field that is used to actually
sort the results will be determined by the application that is
querying the index.
I'm wondering if
I am running into a stumbling block and can only find a way to solve the
problem with some sort of hierarchical faceting system. I am in the
process of moving my records from eXist (http://exist.sf.net) to Solr,
but the problem is with the lack of a "directory structure" that exist
has. I fig
Hello,
I've got a Solr index running and I want to use a dynamicField to
store n different sorting fields. The field that is used to actually
sort the results will be determined by the application that is
querying the index.
I'm wondering if anyone has done something similar to this, or i
It is tracked in http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-42
...there are currently no patches.
: Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 15:04:25 -0800 (PST)
: From: nick19701 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
: To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
: Subject: Re: [2] Highlighting problems
Assuming I'm understanding your question correctly, something like that
would probably work just fine -- just do prefix searches on your
directories when you want to find all files in that directory or any
decendent directory, and use facet counds to see the list of decendent
directories and the n
: back in just now. Here's an example trying to warm using a sort on
: field name "subject". I tried query of
: "allMessageContent:trying;subject+asc" as well as
: "allMessageContent:trying;subject" (without "+asc") - either way
when expressing params in XML (either as init params for a request
ha
: It would be useful to have a solr setting for stripping the dynamic field
: suffix/prefix on index field name to get back the original field name. Does
: it make sense?
sorry, i'm really not following this talk of "stripping" the dynamic field
name to get back the "original" field name ... what
Hmm ... I had a brain storm.
Could I do something like this:
Dir1/Subdir1/SubSubDir1
Then query collection:"Dir1/Subdir1" and get the facets on collection at
that point to see all of the subsubdirectories?
Is their any better method?
Andrew
Andrew Nagy wrote:
I am running into a stumbling b
On 3/7/07, Jeff Rodenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Oops, my bad I didn't see either 186 or 187 before entering 188. :-)
I have closed SOLR-186 and SOLR-187 as duplicates, please add relevant
info to SOLR-188 if needed.
-Bertrand
42 matches
Mail list logo
