pl unsubscribe me
On 12/28/09, Subscriptions sub.scripti...@metaheuristica.com wrote:
I am trying to write a query analyzer to pull:
1. Common phrases (also known as Collocations) with in a query
2. Highly unusual phrases (also known as Statistically Improbable
Phrases or
Hi,
Jay Fisher wrote:
I'm trying to find a way to formulate the following query in solrJ. This is
the only way I can get the desired result but I can't figure out how to get
solrJ to generate the same query string. It always generates a url that
starts with select and I need it to start with
Thank you. That did it.
~ Jay
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 7:21 AM, Sascha Szott sz...@zib.de wrote:
Hi,
Jay Fisher wrote:
I'm trying to find a way to formulate the following query in solrJ. This
is
the only way I can get the desired result but I can't figure out how to
get
solrJ to
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 11:35 PM, Fuad Efendi f...@efendi.ca wrote:
I tried... I set APR to improve performance... server is slow while replica;
but top shows only 1% of I/O wait... it is probably environment specific;
So you're saying that stock tomcat (non-native APR) was also 10 times slower?
Hello,
when searching for a string: asdf5qwerty solr will tokenize it to:
asdf, 5, qwerty and display documents matching either string.
How can i stop this behaviour and make it just search for plain
asdf5qwerty?
thanks in advance.
Bernd
Thank you Yonik, excellent WIKI! I'll try without APR, I believe it's
environmental issue; 100Mbps switched should do 10 times faster (current
replica speed is 1Mbytes/sec)
-Original Message-
From: ysee...@gmail.com [mailto:ysee...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Yonik
Seeley
Sent:
when searching for a string: asdf5qwerty solr will
tokenize it to:
asdf, 5, qwerty and display documents matching either
string.
How can i stop this behaviour and make it just search for
plain
asdf5qwerty?
What is the type of your field? If you have solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory in
This is an *extremely* useful page for figuring out what various
tokenizers/filters are doing. The javadocs for the classes
referenced can also provide some additional details
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/AnalyzersTokenizersTokenFilters
Erick
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Bernd Brod
Related to the difference between rsync and native Solr replication -
we are seeing issues with Solr 1.4 where search queries that come in
during a replication request hang for excessive amount of time (up to
100's of seconds for a result normally that takes ~50 ms).
We are replicating pretty
At the NOVA Apache Lucene/Solr Meetup last May, one of the speakers
from Near Infinity (Aaron McCurry I think) mentioned that he had a
patch for lucene that enabled unlimited depth memory-efficient paging.
Is anyone in contact with him?
-Peter
On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Grant Ingersoll
Lance:
At times we dont have the freedom make these Database changes.
Currently I am in this situation. Hence the requirement on the DIH.
~Ravi.
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Lance Norskog goks...@gmail.com wrote:
The other option is to have a 'deleted' column in your table, and
Is there any way to modify result ranking using an integer field?
I have documents that have an integer field popularity.
I want to rank results by a combination of normal fulltext search
relevance and popularity. It's kinda like search in digg - result
ranking is based on the search
Is there any way to modify result
ranking using an integer field?
I have documents that have an integer field popularity.
I want to rank results by a combination of normal fulltext
search
relevance and popularity. It's kinda like search in digg -
result
ranking is based on the
Hi All,
Anyone who knows how to index the latest MS office documents like .docx and
.xlsx ?
From searching it seems like Tika only supports the earlier formats .doc and
.xls
med venlig hilsen/best regards
Roland Villemoes
Tel: (+45) 22 69 59 62
E-Mail: mailto:r...@alpha-solutions.dk
On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Peter Wolanin peter.wola...@acquia.com wrote:
Related to the difference between rsync and native Solr replication -
we are seeing issues with Solr 1.4 where search queries that come in
during a replication request hang for excessive amount of time (up to
100's
Hi Roland,
You probably want to send your email to tika-u...@lucene.apache.org.
Best of luck!
Cheers,
Chris
On 1/3/10 4:00 PM, Roland Villemoes r...@alpha-solutions.dk wrote:
Hi All,
Anyone who knows how to index the latest MS office documents like .docx and
.xlsx ?
From searching
I have a Solr (version 1.3) powered search server running in production.
Search is keyword driven is supported using custom fields and tokenizers.
I am planning to build a rules engine on top search. The rules are database
driven and can't be stored inside solr indexes. These rules would
Sorting and index norms have space penalties.
Sorting on a field creates an array of Java ints, one for every
document in the index. Index norms (used for boosting documents and
other things) create an array of bytes in the Lucene index files, one
for every document in the index.
If you sort
: If you sort on many of your dynamic fields your memory use will
: explode, and the same with index norms and disk space.
: Thanks for the info. In general, I knew sorting was expensive, but I didn't
: realize that dynamic fields made it worse.
dynamic fields don't make it worse ... the
dynamic fields don't make it worse ... the number of actaul field names
you sort on makes it worse.
If you sort on 100 fields, the cost is the same regardless of wether all
100 of those fields exist because of a single dynamicField/ declaration,
or 100 distinct field/ declarations.
Thanks Ahmet.
Do I need to do anything to enable BoostQParserPlugin in Solr, or is it already
enabled?
--- On Sun, 1/3/10, Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com wrote:
From: Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Any way to modify result ranking using an integer field?
To:
Hello everyone,
Is there an article which explains (on a high level) the algorithm of search in
Solr?
How does Solr search approach compare to the inverted index technique?
Regards,
Abhishek
--Original Message--
From: Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
ReplyTo:
: Yes, I thought about adding some 'new syntax', but I opted for a separate
'facet.sortorder' parameter,
:
: mainly because I'm not familiar enough with the codebase to know what effect
this might have on
:
: backward compatibility. It would be easy enough to modify the patch I created
to do
What I meant was that is there any way to make {!boost b=log(popularity)} the
default query type so that every query will be using it.
From: Andy angelf...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Any way to modify result ranking using an integer field?
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Date: Monday, January 4,
24 matches
Mail list logo
