Hi,
I just downloaded apache-solr-1.4.1 and am trying to run an edismax query using
the defType argument as edismax.
But I am setting an Unkown query type exception.
Mar 23, 2011 10:28:42 AM org.apache.solr.common.SolrException log
SEVERE: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Unknown query
I'd separate the splitting of the binary documents from the sharding in Solr -
they're different things and the split may be required at different levels, due
to different numbers of documents.
Splitting the dependency means that you can store the path in the document and
not need to infer
I just downloaded apache-solr-1.4.1 and am trying to run an
edismax query using the defType argument as edismax.
You need 3.1 or trunk for that.
NOTE: Solr 3.1 will include an experimental version of the Extended DisMax
parsing http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DisMaxQParserPlugin
Hi Gora,
I appreciate your help.
I´ve done what you said but if omit fetchMailsSince full-import doesn´t
work.
This´s the messenge on the console ...SEVERE: Full Import
failed:org.apache.solr.handler.dataimport.DataImportHandlerException:
Invalid value for fetchMailSince: Processing Document #
Hi everyone,
I know that Solr cannot match 1 value in a multi-valued field with
the corresponding value in another multi-valued field. However my data set
appears to be in that form at the moment.
With that in mind does anyone know of any good articles or
discussions that have
Hi,
I have downloaded apache-solr1.4.1 and then applied patch SOLR-1553 to enable
the EdismaxParserQueryPlugin, but inspite of this I get the Unknown query type
error.
Swapnonil Mukherjee
+91-40092712
+91-9007131999
On 23-Mar-2011, at 4:36 PM, Ahmet Arslan wrote:
I just downloaded
Hi Gora,
Also, all the emails were received after that date.
Regards,
Matias.
2011/3/23 Gora Mohanty g...@mimirtech.com
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Matias Alonso matiasgalo...@gmail.com
wrote:
[...]
The problem is that I´m indexing emails throw Data import Handler using
Gmail
Hi All,
As for my project Requirement i need to keep privacy for search of
files so that i need to modify the code of solr,
for example if there are 5 users and each user indexes some files as
user1 - java1, c1,sap1
user2 - java2, c2,sap2
user3 - java3, c3,sap3
user4 - java4,
Just a suggestion ..
You can try using dynamic fields by appending the company name (or ID)
as prefix ... e.g.
For data -
Employee ID Employer FromDate ToDate
21345
IBM 01/01/04 01/01/06
MS 01/01/07 01/01/08
BT 01/01/09 Present
Index data as :-
Employee ID - 21345
Employer Name - IBM MS BT
Why not just add an extra field to the document in the Index for the
user, so you can easily filter out the results on the user field and
show only the documents submitted by the User.
Regards,
Jayendra
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:20 AM, satya swaroop satya.yada...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
Hi,
depending on your needs, take a look at Apache ManifoldCF. It adds
document-level security on top of Solr.
-Sascha
On 23.03.2011 14:20, satya swaroop wrote:
Hi All,
As for my project Requirement i need to keep privacy for search of
files so that i need to modify the code of
I have downloaded apache-solr1.4.1 and then applied patch
SOLR-1553 to enable the EdismaxParserQueryPlugin, but
inspite of this I get the Unknown query type error.
Hmm, I don't know about whether it is usable/compatible with solr 1.4.1 but you
can try to register edismax in solrconfig.xml as
Hi Jayendra,
I forgot to mention the result also depends on the group of
user too It is some wat complex so i didnt tell it.. now i explain the
exact way..
user1, group1 - java1, c1,sap1
user2 ,group2- java2, c2,sap2
user3 ,group1,group3- java3, c3,sap3
user4 ,group3-
I'm still confused as to why I'm getting this error. To me it reads that the
.java file was declared incorrectly but I shouldn't need to change those
files so where am I doing something incorrectly?
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Brian Lamb
brian.l...@journalexperts.comwrote:
That fixed that
Hi,
It worked! Thanks a lot. At least I don't get the stacktrace on the jetty
console and the Unknown query type error after adding this entry to the
solrconfig.xml.
We will have to examine the results to see if the Edismax parser is really
kicking in.
Swapnonil Mukherjee
+91-40092712
I'm using solr 1.4.1.
I have a document that has a pretty big field. If I search for a
phrase that occurs near the start of that field, it works fine. If I
search for a phrase that appears even a little ways into the field, it
doesn't find it. Is there some limit to how far into a field solr will
Hi Paul,
did you increase the value of the maxFieldLength parameter in your
solrconfig.xml?
-Sascha
On 23.03.2011 17:05, Paul wrote:
I'm using solr 1.4.1.
I have a document that has a pretty big field. If I search for a
phrase that occurs near the start of that field, it works fine. If I
Ah, no, I'll try that now.
What is the disadvantage of setting that to a really large number?
I do want the search to work for every word I give to solr. Otherwise
I wouldn't have indexed it to begin with.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Sascha Szott sz...@zib.de wrote:
Hi Paul,
did you
Hi,
is it possible, USING DISMAX SEARCH HANDLER, to make a search like:
search value1 in field1 value 2 in field 2 ??
it's like q=field1:value1 field2:value2 in standard search, but i want to do
this in dismax
Thanx
--
Gastone Penzo
*www.solr-italia.it*
*The first italian blog about
How large?
But rather than think about if there's something in the searching
that's not working, the first step might be to make sure that everything
in the _indexing_ is working -- that your field is actually being
indexed as you intend.
I forget the best way to view what's in your index
It is not. I think it is is possible in edismax, on trunk (not yet in a
released version, not sure if it will be in the upcoming release).
Alternately, you can use Solr nested queries, although they're not
really suitable for end-user-entry, and you might lose the behavior of
dismax you
In that case, you may want to store the groups as multivalued fields
who would have access to the document.
A filter query on the user group should have the results filtered as
you expect.
you may also check Apache ManifoldCF as suggested by Szott.
Regards,
Jayendra
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:46
I increased maxFieldLength and reindexed a small number of documents.
That worked -- I got the correct results. In 3 minutes!
I assume that if I reindex all my documents that all searches will
become even slower. Is there any way to get all the results in a way
that is quick enough that my user
I'm still confused as to why I'm
getting this error. To me it reads that the
.java file was declared incorrectly but I shouldn't need to
change those
files so where am I doing something incorrectly?
Brian, I think best thing to do is checkout a new clean copy from subversion
and then do
Hmm, there's no reason it should take anywhere close 3 minutes to get a
result from a simple search, even with very large documents/term lists.
Especially if you're really JUST doing a simple search, you aren't using
facetting or statistics component or highlighting etc at this point. (If
you
On 23.03.2011 18:52, Paul wrote:
I increased maxFieldLength and reindexed a small number of documents.
That worked -- I got the correct results. In 3 minutes!
Did you mark the field in question as stored = false?
-Sascha
I assume that if I reindex all my documents that all searches will
Hello,
The problem turned out to be some sort of sharding/searching weirdness. We
modified some code in sharding but I don't think it is related. In any case,
we just added a new server that just shards (but doesn't do any searching /
doesn't contain any index) and performance is very very good.
Hi All,
This is regarding nested array functionality. I have requirements
1. to store category and sub-category association with a word in the Solr.
2. Also each word can be listed under multiple categories (and thus
sub-categories).
3. Query based on category or sub-category.
One way is to
Thank you for the suggestion. I followed your advice and was able to get a
version up and running. Thanks again for all the help!
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm still confused as to why I'm
getting this error. To me it reads that the
.java file
I looked into the search that I'm doing a little closer and it seems
like the highlighting is slowing it down. If I do the query without
requesting highlighting it is fast. (BTW, I also have faceting and
pagination in my query. Faceting doesn't seem to change the response
time much, adding rows=
Yeah, you aren't going to be able to do highlighting on a very very
large field without terrible performance. I believe it's just the
nature of the algorithm used by the highlighting component. I don't know
of any workaround. Other than inventing a new algorithm for
highlighting and writing
Enable TermVectors for fields that you're going tot highlight. If it is
disabled Solr will reanalyze the field, killing performance.
I looked into the search that I'm doing a little closer and it seems
like the highlighting is slowing it down. If I do the query without
requesting highlighting
Have you enabled the collapse component in solconfig.xml?
searchComponent name=query
class=org.apache.solr.handler.component.CollapseComponent /
Thanks
afroz
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Kai Schlamp-2
kai.schl...@googlemail.comwrote:
Unfortunately I have to use Solr 1.4.x or 3.x as one
Hi,
This solr query faile:
1. get every title regardless what the title_name is
2. within the result, boost the one which genre id = 56. (bq=genres:56^100)
: It looks like Dismax query parser can somehow handle parens, used for
: applying, for instance, + or - to a group, distributing it. But I'm not
: sure what effect they have on the overall query.
parens are treated like any regular character -- they have no semantic
meaning.
what may be
Hi,
I need to code some boosting logic when some field equal to some value. I
was able to get it work if using dismax query parser. However, since the
solr query will need to handle prefix or fuzzy query, therefore, dismax
query parser is not really my choice.
Therefore, i want to use
Hi Jayendra,
the group field can be kept if the no. of groups are
small... if a user may belong to 1000 groups in that case it would be
difficult to make a query???, if a user changes the groups then we have to
reindex the data again...
ok i will try ur suggestion, if it can
37 matches
Mail list logo
