Hi all,
I'm a relative newcomer to Solr, and I'm trying to use it in a project
of mine. I need to do a function query (I believe) to filter the
results so they are within a certain distance of a point. For this, I
understand I should use something like sqedist or hsin, and from the
documentation
Hi David, thanks for replying,
The field boost attribute was put there by me back in the 1.3 days, when
I somehow gained the mistaken impression that it was supposed to work!
Of course, despite a lot of searching I haven't been able to find
anything to back up my position ;)
Unfortunately our
Thank u all.
I have increased the heap size memory from 1gb to 1.5gb. Now its
java -Xms512M -Xmx1536M -jar start.jar, My cpu load is normal and solr
is not restating frequently,
My autocommit maxdoc increased to 200.
For last 24 hours no issue on load/restarts.
Thanks Guys.
Hello,
If I define a field like this in the schema ,is this correct ?
fieldType name=*text_match_phrase*
class=*solr.TextField*positionIncrementGap
=*100*
- http://sites.google.com/a/impelsys.com/search/phrase-match# analyzer
tokenizer class=*solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory* /
filter
On Nov 20, 2009, at 3:15 AM, Oliver Beattie wrote:
Hi all,
I'm a relative newcomer to Solr, and I'm trying to use it in a project
of mine. I need to do a function query (I believe) to filter the
results so they are within a certain distance of a point. For this, I
understand I should use
On Nov 20, 2009, at 7:22 AM, revas wrote:
Hello,
If I define a field like this in the schema ,is this correct ?
fieldType name=*text_match_phrase*
class=*solr.TextField*positionIncrementGap
=*100*
- http://sites.google.com/a/impelsys.com/search/phrase-match# analyzer
tokenizer
On Nov 19, 2009, at 4:59 PM, aseem cheema wrote:
Hey Guys,
I need to filter out some results based on who is performing the
search. In other words, if a document is not accessible to a user
performing search, I don't want it to be in the result set. What is
the best/easiest way to do this
Hi,
Can I have one instance of Solr write the index and date to multiple drives
? e.g.
Can I configure Solr to do something like -
dataDirc:\data/dataDir
dataDird:\data/dataDir
dataDire:\data/dataDir
Or is the suggested way to use multiple Solr cores and have the application
shard the index
Hi,
I tried using the recommended approach but to no benefit. The multiword
synonyms are still not appearing in the result.
My schema.xml has the following fieldType:
fieldType name=text class=solr.TextField positionIncrementGap=100
analyzer type=index
tokenizer
Even i want to upgrade from v1.3 to 1.4
I did 1.3 index directory replace with 1.4 and associated schema changes
in that. Its throwing lot of exception like datatype mismatch with
Integer, String, Date, etc. Even the results are coming with some error
example: str
Hi Guys,
I am trying to use Solr Cell to extract body content from documents, and
also to pass along some literal field values. Trouble is, some of the
literal fields contain spaces, colons etc. which cause a bad request
exception in the server. However, if I URL encode these fields the
In version 1.3 EventDate field type is date, In 1.4 also its date But we
are getting the following error.
str
name=EventDateERROR:SCHEMA-INDEX-MISMATCH,stringValue=2008-05-16T07:19:28/str
-kalidoss.m,
kalidoss wrote:
Even i want to upgrade from v1.3 to 1.4
I did 1.3 index directory
Hello All,
I am a newbie using Solr and Lucene. In my task, I have
to create org.apache.lucene.document.Document objects from external
valid Solr xml files.To be brief, depending on the names of the fields
I need to modify corresponding values which is specific to our
project. So I
Sorry guys, the bad request seemed to be caused elsewhere, no need to
URL encode now.
Ian.
-Original Message-
From: Ian Smith [mailto:ian.sm...@gossinteractive.com]
Sent: 20 November 2009 15:26
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Solr Cell text extraction
Hi Guys,
I am trying to
did you extend DIH to do this work? can you share code samples. I have
similar requirement where I need tp index database records and each record
has a column with document path so need to create another index for
documents (we allow users to search both index separately) in parallel with
reading
Glock, did you get this approach to work? let me know.
Thanks,
Glock, Thomas wrote:
I have a similar situation but not expecting any easy setup. Currently
the tables contain both a url to the file and quite a bit of additional
metadata about the file. I'm planning one initial load to
Hi Aseem -
I had a similar challenge. The solution that works for my case was to
add role as a repeating string value in the solr schema.
Each piece of content contains 1 or more roles and these values are
supplied to solr for indexing.
Users also have one or more roles (which correspond
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 10:26 AM, kalidoss
kalidoss.muthuramalin...@sifycorp.com wrote:
In version 1.3 EventDate field type is date, In 1.4 also its date But we are
getting the following error.
Use the schema you had with 1.3 and it should work. The example
schemas are not backward compatible
When I do a search using q=*:* and then narrow down the result set using
a filter query, are there rules that are used for the sort order in the
result set? In my results I have a name field that appears to be
sorted descending in lexicographical order. For example:
docstr
Mike wrote:
When I do a search using q=*:* and then narrow down the result set
using a filter query, are there rules that are used for the sort order
in the result set? In my results I have a name field that appears to
be sorted descending in lexicographical order. For example:
docstr
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Mike mpiluson...@comcast.net wrote:
Sorry for the noise - I think I have just answered my own question. The
order in which docs are indexed determine the result sort order unless
overridden via sort query parameters :)
Correct. The internal lucene document id
Hi,
I have a requirement to get results in the order of latest date of a field
called approval_dt. ie results having the latest approval date should appear
first in the SOLR results xml. A sorting desc on approval_dt gave me this.
Can index-time boost be of use here to improve performance. Could
Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Mike mpiluson...@comcast.net wrote:
Sorry for the noise - I think I have just answered my own question. The
order in which docs are indexed determine the result sort order unless
overridden via sort query parameters :)
Correct.
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Yonik Seeley
yo...@lucidimagination.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Mike mpiluson...@comcast.net wrote:
Sorry for the noise - I think I have just answered my own question. The
order in which docs are indexed determine the result sort order unless
Hoss,
Using Solr 1.4, I see constant index growth until an optimize. I
commit (hundreds of updates) every 5 minutes and have a mergefactor of
10, but every 50 minutes I don't see the index collapse down to its
original size -- it's slightly larger.
Over the course of a week, the index grew from
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Michael solrco...@gmail.com wrote:
So -- I thought I understood you to mean that if I frequently merge,
it's basically the same as an optimize, and cruft will get purged. Am
I misunderstanding you?
That only applies to the segments involved in the merge. The
Thank you much for your responses guys. I do not have ACL. I need to
make a web service call to find out if a user has access to a
document. I was hoping to get search results, call the web service
with the IDs from the search results telling me what IDs the user has
access to, and then filter
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Yonik Seeley
yo...@lucidimagination.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Michael solrco...@gmail.com wrote:
So -- I thought I understood you to mean that if I frequently merge,
it's basically the same as an optimize, and cruft will get purged. Am
I
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Michael solrco...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Yonik Seeley
yo...@lucidimagination.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Michael solrco...@gmail.com wrote:
So -- I thought I understood you to mean that if I frequently merge,
it's
Hi,
I'm using SOLR(1.4) to search among about 3,500,000 documents. After the
server kernel was updated to 64bit system has started to suffer.
Our server has 8G of RAM and double Intel Core 2 DUO.
We used to have average loads around 2-2,5. It was not as good as it
should but as long HTTP
Hi,
If I understand you correctly, you really want to be constructing
SolrInputDocuments (not Lucene's Documents) and indexing those with SolrJ. I
don't think there is anything in the API that can read in an XML file and
convert it into a SolrInputDocuments instance, but aren't there libraries
Hi,
No, dataDir is a single directory, so limited to single partition on a single
drive. But, you can always have disks in RAID, and then it could be spread
over multiple drives.
Yes, if you have multiple Solr cores and multiple drives, you could put them on
different drivers for performance
DirectSolrConnection is older and has not been changed in a year.
SolrJ is the preferred way to code an app against Solr.
SolrJ with the Embedded server will have the same performance
characteristics as DirectSolrConnection.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 5:55 AM, dipti khullar dipti.khul...@gmail.com
Nice! I didn't notice that before. Very useful.
2009/11/19 Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ् noble.p...@corp.aol.com:
you can pass the uniqueId as a param and use it in a sql query
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DataImportHandler#Accessing_request_parameters.
--Noble
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 3:53 PM,
Yes, these are both bugs. SolrJ should do field lists right, and
distributed search should work exactly the same as normal search.
Please file these in the JIRA.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Asaf work a...@dapper.net wrote:
Hi,
I'm using the SolrJ 1.4 client driver in a sharded Solr
solr/admin/stats.jsp gives a much larger XML dump and also includes
these two data items.
Note that Luke can walk the entire index data structures, so if you
have a large index it's like playing with fire.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Binkley, Peter
peter.bink...@ualberta.ca wrote:
The Luke
No, the reverse is true. Sorting is very very fast in Lucene. The
first sort operation spends a lot of time making a data structure and
then following sort calls use it.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Anil Cherian
cherian.anil2...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi David,
I just now tried a sorting on the
And, terms whose documents have been deleted are not purged. So, you
can merge all you like and the index will not shrink back completely.
Only an optimize will remove the orphan terms.
This is important because the orphan terms affect relevance
calculations. So you really want to purge them with
Hi ,
I'm relatively new to Solr/Lucene, and am using Solr (and not lucene
directly) primarily because I can use it without writing java code (rest of
my project is python coded).
My application has the following requirements:
(a) ability to search over multiple fields, each with different weight
39 matches
Mail list logo
