Shalin,
Many thanks for your tipBut it did not seem to help!
Do you think I can use postDeleteImportQuery for this task?
Should I file a bug report?
Cheers,
Bill
--
From: "Shalin Shekhar Mangar"
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 1:16 PM
To:
Good catch. I was testing on a nightly build from mid-July. I just tested on
a similar deployment with nightly code from Oct 5th and everything seems to
work.
My mid-July deployment breaks on sints, integers, sdouble, doubles, slongs
and longs. My more recent deployment works with tints, sints,
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:54 PM, William Pierce wrote:
> Folks:
>
> Continuing my saga with DIH and use of its special commands. I have
> verified that the script functionality is indeed working.I also verified
> that '$skipRow' is working.But I don't think that '$deleteDocById' is
> work
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar
wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Audrey Foo wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Shalin
>> I mixed up and sent the wrong schema, one that I had been testing with.
>> I was using the same configuration as the example schema with the same
>> results. I r
Is this with trunk? I can't seem to reproduce this... what's the field type?
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 3:01 PM, wojtekpia wrote:
>
> I'm seeing the same behavior and I don't have any custom query parsing
> plugins. Similar to the original post, my queries lik
I'm seeing the same behavior and I don't have any custom query parsing
plugins. Similar to the original post, my queries like:
select?q=field:[1 TO *]
select?q=field:[1 TO 2]
select?q=field:[1 TO 2]&debugQuery=true
work correctly, but including an unboundd range appears to break the debug
compon
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Audrey Foo wrote:
>
> Hi Shalin
> I mixed up and sent the wrong schema, one that I had been testing with.
> I was using the same configuration as the example schema with the same
> results. I re-tested by re-indexing just to confirm. Also, yes I do have
> lowercas
Hi folks,
I'm having an issue where I want MLT to operate on multiple fields, one of
which contains a large number of terms (that is, each document in the index
has many terms for this field) and the others only a few terms per document.
In my situation, the fields with the fewer terms I am boosti
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jérôme Etévé
Date: 2009/10/16
Subject: Re: Replication filelist command failure on container restart
To: yo...@lucidimagination.com
Thanks Yonik,
It works now!
J.
2009/10/16 Yonik Seeley :
> I think you may need to tell the replication handler to
Hi all,
I'm trying to figure out which query parser handles nested queries
(the kind documented here:
http://www.lucidimagination.com/blog/2009/03/31/nested-queries-in-solr/).
When working with Solr 1.3 stable, I'm able to use this syntax
effectively using the default requestHandler, but when I am
I think you may need to tell the replication handler to enable
replication after startup too?
commit
startup
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Jérôme Etévé wrote:
> Hi All,
> I'm facing a small problem with the replication handler:
>
> Af
Pravin,
Hadoop allows jaring libraries into a jar under /lib. So I have
my code, then put apache-solr-core-1.4-dev.jar, and all the
other Solr related jars into it using "ant clean jar && jar uvf
target/myhadoopsolr.jar lib/*". Then on your Hadoop cluster run
something like: "/app/hadoop/bin/hadoo
Hi All,
I'm facing a small problem with the replication handler:
After restarting my master container (tomcat),
/admin/replication/index.jsp shows me the right information,
basically the same indexversion as before the restart (no
commits/optimize have been done after restart):
Local Index
Hi Shalin
I mixed up and sent the wrong schema, one that I had been testing with.
I was using the same configuration as the example schema with the same results.
I re-tested by re-indexing just to confirm. Also, yes I do have lowercase
factory after the word delimiter.
powerShot does not return
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Joe Calderon wrote:
> hello * , ive read in other threads that lucene 2.9 had a serious bug
> in it, hence trunk moved to 2.9.1 dev, im wondering what the bug is as
> ive been using the 2.9.0 version for the past weeks with no problems,
> is it critical to upgrade
Joe Calderon wrote:
> hello * , ive read in other threads that lucene 2.9 had a serious bug
> in it, hence trunk moved to 2.9.1 dev, im wondering what the bug is as
> ive been using the 2.9.0 version for the past weeks with no problems,
> is it critical to upgrade?
>
> --joe
>
http://search.luci
hello * , ive read in other threads that lucene 2.9 had a serious bug
in it, hence trunk moved to 2.9.1 dev, im wondering what the bug is as
ive been using the 2.9.0 version for the past weeks with no problems,
is it critical to upgrade?
--joe
Folks:
Continuing my saga with DIH and use of its special commands. I have
verified that the script functionality is indeed working.I also verified
that '$skipRow' is working.But I don't think that '$deleteDocById' is
working.
My script now looks as follows:
You can follow the action on solr-dev. We are in code freeze right
now. I'll likely put up another release candidate today. Everyone
can help out by downloading either the existing RC or nightly or trunk
and testing it out and providing feedback. It would also be great if
people could s
ppl will wait lucene 2.9.1 since 2.9 have a "great" bug in it.
[]s,
Lucas Frare Teixeira .·.
- lucas...@gmail.com
- lucastex.com.br
- blog.lucastex.com
- twitter.com/lucastex
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Rob Ganly wrote:
> i was wondering the same thing since:
>
> '*NOTE: THE CURRENT GOA
i was wondering the same thing since:
'*NOTE: THE CURRENT GOAL IS TO START THE SOLR 1.4 RELEASE PROCESS
APPROXIMATELY ONE TO TWO WEEKS AFTER LUCENE JAVA 2.9 HAS BEEN RELEASED.* '
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/Solr1.4
patiently,
rob
2009/10/16 Michael R.
>
> Any news on this? Lucene 2.9 is out
Any news on this? Lucene 2.9 is out for some weeks now.
markrmiller wrote:
>
> Agreed! We are pushing towards it - one of the holds up is that Lucene 2.9
> is about to release, so we are waiting for that. We really need to prune
> down the JIRA list though. A few have been tackling it, but ma
I have reverted the DIH wiki page to revision 212. see this
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2270
the wiki has not sent any mail yet
So all the changes which were made after 212 is lost. Please go
through the page and check if your changes are lost.
--
-
23 matches
Mail list logo
