Ok, I will create a JIRA for it.
2013/6/11 Mark Miller markrmil...@gmail.com
On Jun 11, 2013, at 4:51 AM, Furkan KAMACI furkankam...@gmail.com wrote:
Why there is no getter method for defaultCollection at CloudSolrServer?
Want to create a JIRA issue to add it?
- Mark
It appears that the word bing appears in the title; is the title field
copied into the default search field (assuming that you even have a default
search field)? If not, you need to somehow specify the field(s) that you
want to search in.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:52 AM, coderslay
What is Difference Between Down and Gone At Admin Cloud Page?
Hi jack,
Here is my schema.xml
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/file/n4069761/schema.xml
My default search field id content
Regards,
Nasir
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Not-getting-results-when-searching-a-term-from-Solr-Admin-tp4069761p4069862.html
There's your problem, then - you have content as the default search
field, but your copyField nodes treat text as the default search field.
If you change the default search field to text, you should be able to
search for bing; otherwise, you'll need to use something like
content:bing.
On Wed,
I use Nutch to index my documents. I have a Nutch aware schema at my Solr
and there is a field like that:
field name=boost type=float stored=true indexed=false/
boost holds the epic score of my documents (similar to Google's pagerank).
How can I boost my queries at Solr side?I followed wiki and
Hi Jack,
I tried doing what you told me still i am facing the same issue :(
Can you provide me some sample schema.xml to work it out?
Regards,
Nasir
--
View this message in context:
I'm not Jack, but...
... locate the line in schema.xml that says
defaultSearchFieldcontent/defaultSearchField
and replace content with text.
You may also have to edit solrconfig.xml if the request handler defines the
parameter df - this, too, should point to your default field.
On Wed, Jun
Hi all,
I am beginner and i try to index pdf, docx, txt files.
How I can I index these format files?
I have installed solr server in /opt/solr
Also I have created documents directory. Then I copied index files in
/opt/solr/documents.
I tried to index below command. Originally almost indexed. I
1) Being aggressive and insulting is not a way to help people understand
such complex tool or to help people in general.
2) I read again the feature page of Solr and it is stated that the
interface is REST-like and not RESTful as I though in the first place, and
communicate to the devs. And as
On 12 June 2013 14:51, Roland Everaert reveatw...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
Any way I still have a question regarding the /extract interface. It seems
that every time a file is updated in Solr, the lucene document is recreated
from scratch which means that any extra information we want to be
Solved it now.
It was a shameful typo in the config:
I wrote pollInterfall instead of pollInterval :-)
It was never polling I just missunderstood the logs...
Thxs
Thomas
-Original Message-
From: thomas.poroc...@der.net [mailto:thomas.poroc...@der.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013
Hi,
I'm browsing to http://localhost:8983/solr and the UI is empty, no data is
shown, while I got a solr server running with data.
Thanks,
Ophir
Apologies Raymond for the Name.
I have tried doing that also and still the same response :(
Regards,
Nasir
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Not-getting-results-when-searching-a-term-from-Solr-Admin-tp4069761p4069880.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing
That's not really enough info.
However in latest solr people sometimes miss the collection selection
dropdown on bottom left.
Have you tried selecting a collection there?
Regards,
Alex
On 12 Jun 2013 06:01, Ophir Michaeli micha...@wesee.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm browsing to
Hi Raymond,
I was playing with it and i specified df=content then i get the results
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/file/n4069888/Selection_020.png
Can you explain me what happened here?
Regards,
Nasir
--
View this message in context:
Hmmm did you restart SOLR after changing the schema? And did you try
searching for content:bing (alternatively, setting the df parameter to
content (without quotes)?
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM, coderslay coolguy18.na...@gmail.comwrote:
Apologies Raymond for the Name.
I have tried
Could I have some help on the combination of these two? Right now, it
appears that I'm stuck with a finalizer to chase after native
resources in a Tokenizer. Am I missing something?
It looks like I haven't paid sufficient attention to your earlier messages
- sorry. It is quite clear that content contains bing, and you should
have gotten results back if the default search field was content.
It could be that your solrconfig.xml file sets df to a field that does not
contain
Barani - the fq option doesn't work.
Jason - the dynamic field option won't work due to the high number of
groups and users.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:12 AM, Jason Hellman
jhell...@innoventsolutions.com wrote:
Aloke,
If you do not have a factorial problem in the combination of userid and
Hi Raymond,
Thanks a lot. It is Appreciated :D
Regards,
Nasir
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Not-getting-results-when-searching-a-term-from-Solr-Admin-tp4069761p4069896.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hello,
we are upgrading from Solr 4.0 to Solr 4.3 because we want to use Atomic
Updates.
But I think something in our Configuration ist not correct yet.
When updating Documents I get the following exception:
org.apache.solr.client.solrj.impl.HttpSolrServer$RemoteSolrException:
Aloke,
It may be best to simply run a query to populate the suggestion list. While
not as fast as the terms component (and suggester offshoots) it can still be
tuned to be very, very fast.
In this way, you can generate any fq/q combination required to meet your needs.
You can play with
I'm running the 2 shards example at http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrCloud.
When browsing to http://localhost:8983/solr (shard 1) I a solr UI screen
without data, the collections combo box is empty (no collections).
Thanks
-Original Message-
From: Alexandre Rafalovitch
Hi,
Which lucene version is used with Solr 4.2.1? And is it possible to open it
by luke? If not by any other tool? Thanks
Thanks
Seems like your boost field needs to be indexed.
On Jun 12, 2013 3:49 AM, Furkan KAMACI furkankam...@gmail.com wrote:
I use Nutch to index my documents. I have a Nutch aware schema at my Solr
and there is a field like that:
field name=boost type=float stored=true indexed=false/
boost holds
Hello!
Solr 4.2.1 is using Lucene 4.2.1. Basically Solr and Lucene are
currently using the same numbers after their development was merged.
As far for Luke I think that the last version is using beta or alpha
release of Lucene 4.0. I would try replacing Lucene jar's and see if
it works although
Note that use of the atomic update feature requires that the Solr
transaction log be enabled in solrconfig using the
updateLog configuration element. For example, as in the standard Solr
example solrconfig:
updateLog
str name=dir${solr.ulog.dir:}/str
/updateLog
Unless you have a custom
On Jun 12, 2013, at 3:19 AM, Furkan KAMACI furkankam...@gmail.com wrote:
What is Difference Between Down and Gone At Admin Cloud Page?
If I remember right, Down can mean the node is still actively working towards
something - eg, without action by you, it might go into recovering or active
Hi,
We are using Solr 4.3.0 SolrCloud (5 shards, 10 replicas). I have couple
questions on shard key.
1. Looking at the admin GUI, how do I know which field is being used
for shard key.
2. What is the default shard key used?
3. How do I override the default shard key?
Hi
Is it possible to implement geo clustering in solr 4.3?
Any documentation on this topic?
Have anyone tried it?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-4-3-Spatial-clustering-tp4069941.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I'm sorry if I came across as aggressive or insulting - I'm only trying to
dig down to what your actual difficulty is - and you have been making that
extremely difficult for all of us. You need to help us all out here by more
clearly expressing what your actual problem is. You will have to
Hi
As I understand, even if I use partial update, lucene can't really update
documents. Solr will use the stored fields in order to pass the values to
lucene, and a delete,add opeartions will still be performed.
If this is the case is there a performance issue when comparing partial
update to
Thanks Jason, querying would be a good way to approach this. Though not
NGram, thinking of doing a wildcard based search use the highlighted text
for suggestions.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Jason Hellman
jhell...@innoventsolutions.com wrote:
Aloke,
It may be best to simply run a
Hi,
We have a multi-sharded and multi-replicated collection (solr 4.3).
When we perform massive indexing (adding 5 million records with 5k bulks,
commit after each bulk), the search performance is degrades a lot (1 sec
query can turn to 4 sec query).
Any rule of thumb regarding best
Correct.
Generally, I think most apps will benefit from partial update, especially if
they have a lot of fields. Otherwise, they will have two round trip requests
rather than one. Solr does the reading of existing document values more
efficiently, under the hood, with no need to format for
Hi,
My first suggestion is to not commit so often. Use autocommit with maxTime
higher than a minute and openSearcher false. Turn on autoSoftCommit and set
that higher than 10 seconds if you can handle it. Use a higher mergeFactor
than 10, like 35 for example.
After that you're probably going to
On 6/12/2013 8:50 AM, adfel70 wrote:
We have a multi-sharded and multi-replicated collection (solr 4.3).
When we perform massive indexing (adding 5 million records with 5k bulks,
commit after each bulk), the search performance is degrades a lot (1 sec
query can turn to 4 sec query).
Any
My question would be, why are you updating 10m documents? Is it because
of denormalised fields? E.g. one system I have needs to reindex all data
for a publication when that publication switches between active and
inactive.
If this is the case, you can perhaps achieve the same using joins. Store
1. To support partial updates, I must have all the fields stored (most of
which I don't need stored)
Wouldn't I suffer in query perforemnce if I store all these fields?
2. Can you elaborate on the large fields issue?
Why does it matter if the fields are large in the context of partial
updates?
Yes it is.
But in my case, these are metadata fields, and I need them to be searchable,
facetable, sortable in the context of the main text fields.
Will I be able to achieve that if I index them in another core?
Upayavira wrote
My question would be, why are you updating 10m documents? Is it
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013, at 04:54 PM, adfel70 wrote:
Yes it is.
But in my case, these are metadata fields, and I need them to be
searchable,
facetable, sortable in the context of the main text fields.
Will I be able to achieve that if I index them in another core?
Unfortunately, at this
When creating a new record in the db, and running the deal-import command, i m
not seeing the new record being indexed. Is there some configuration I need to
set? The use is the db already has records loaded and I would like to index new
records. Whats the process? Any ideas please?
Thanks
On 6/12/2013 9:50 AM, adfel70 wrote:
1. To support partial updates, I must have all the fields stored (most of
which I don't need stored)
Wouldn't I suffer in query perforemnce if I store all these fields?
2. Can you elaborate on the large fields issue?
Why does it matter if the fields are
Any reason why not index these metadata fields in the same core?
Would I be able to sort, facet with join queries if the joined docs are in
the same core?
Upayavira wrote
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013, at 04:54 PM, adfel70 wrote:
Yes it is.
But in my case, these are metadata fields, and I need them
On 12 June 2013 21:34, PeriS pvsub...@indiana.edu wrote:
When creating a new record in the db, and running the deal-import command, i
m not seeing the new record being indexed. Is there some configuration I need
to set? The use is the db already has records loaded and I would like to
index
Yes, you need to have all the fields stored to do a partial update.
Generally, not storing field values causes all sorts of headaches that far
outweigh the modest benefit in memory savings.
Generally, make everything stored - unless you have specific and VERY
COMPELLING need not to. Back in
Correction: The query was price_c:1, can someone please explain ?
Thanks
Subashini
On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Subashini Soundararajan wrote:
Hi,
I have imported the money.xml doc in lucene -
https://github.com/normann/apache-solr/blob/master/example/exampledocs/money.xml
I tried the query:
check this link..
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11319465/geoclusters-in-solr
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-4-3-Spatial-clustering-tp4069941p4069986.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I suppose you can implement custom hashing by using _shard_ field. I am not
sure on this, but I have come across this approach sometime back..
At query time, you can specify shard.keys parameter...
--
View this message in context:
1. Current num records in db: 4
2. Created a new record and called delta-import using the following url;
localhost:8983/dataimport?command=delta-import
SOLR Log here : http://apaste.info/gF3N
3. When i tried checking the status from the browser - logs are here:
http://apaste.info/gxDF
http://localhost:8983/solr/doc1/select?q=text:()debugQuery=ondefType=lucene
I get this error:
org.apache.solr.search.SyntaxError: Cannot parse 'text:()': Encountered
) ) at line 1, column 6. Was expecting one of: NOT ... + ... -
... BAREOPER ... ( ... * ... QUOTED ... TERM ... PREFIXTERM ...
I would suggest you to take the suggested string and create another query to
solr along with the filter parameter.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Filtering-down-terms-in-suggest-tp4069627p4069997.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at
Not sure what you are trying to achieve.
I assume you are trying to return the documents that doesn't contain any
value in a particular field..
You can use the below query for that..
http://localhost:8983/solr/doc1/select?q=-text:*debugQuery=ondefType=lucene
--
View this message in context:
: Subject: What is wrong with this blank query?
:
: http://localhost:8983/solr/doc1/select?q=text:()debugQuery=ondefType=lucene
that's not a blank query ... when you use the parens you are telling the
query parser you want ot create a BooleanQuery object, and then you aren't
including any
Try answering this question: What do you imagine the semantics would be for
that query. I mean, what kind of results do you think it should return that
would be obvious and apparent and useful for an average application. Solr is
simply telling you that it sure looks mighty suspicious!
Why
The ticket for the legend is SOLR-3915, the definition came up in SOLR-3174:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3174?focusedCommentId=13255923page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13255923
On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Mark Miller
Try the LucidWorks Search query parser - it should handle this without
complaint, since an empty query can be omitted by the parser with no ill
effect. Solr and Lucene are simply being overly picky.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Shankar Sundararaju
Sent: Wednesday, June
What would be the process to update a new record in an existing db using DIH?
On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:06 PM, PeriS pvsub...@indiana.edu wrote:
1. Current num records in db: 4
2. Created a new record and called delta-import using the following url;
localhost:8983/dataimport?command=delta-import
From my understanding.
In SOLR cloud the CompositeIdDocRouter uses HashbasedDocRouter.
CompositeId router is default if your numShards1 on collection creation.
CompositeId router generates an hash using the uniqueKey defined in your
schema.xml to route your documents to a dedicated shard.
You
I currently have the following:
I am running the example-DIH instance of solr, and it works fine.
I then change the data-db-confix.xml file to make the dataSource the following:
dataSource type=JdbcDataSource
driver=com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver
The below config file works fine with sql server. Make sure you are using the
correct database / server name.
dataConfig
dataSource type=JdbcDataSource
driver=com.microsoft.sqlserver.jdbc.SQLServerDriver
This link might be useful too:
http://www.semanticmetadata.net/2013/04/11/luke-4-2-binaries/.
Kind regards,
Heikki Doeleman
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Rafał Kuć r@solr.pl wrote:
Hello!
Solr 4.2.1 is using Lucene 4.2.1. Basically Solr and Lucene are
currently using the same
This page has some good information on custom document routing:
http://docs.lucidworks.com/display/solr/Shards+and+Indexing+Data+in+SolrCloud
-Original Message-
From: Rishi Easwaran [mailto:rishi.easwa...@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:40 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Hi allI am trying to configure external zookeeper with solr instances which has
to have 2 shards.I tried the introductory solrcloud wiki page and lucidworks
solrcloud page it works just fine(embedded zookeeper),The problem i have is
start solr with 2 shards when i have external zookeeper,i cant
In upgrading from Solr 3.6.1 to 4.3.0, our query response time has
increased exponentially. After testing in 4.3.0 it appears the same query
(with 1 matching document) returns after 100 ms without sorting but takes 1
minute when sorting by a text field. I've looked around but haven't yet
found a
We have a need to dynamically create new fields. These fields would mostly be
used for new facet types.
While I could modify, as needed, the schema, that presents some deployment
issues (such as needing to restart the Solr service). Whereas, something such
as elasticsearch's schema-free model,
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPerformanceFactors
If you do a lot of field based sorting, it is advantageous to add explicitly
warming queries to the newSearcher and firstSearcher event listeners in
your solrconfig which sort on those fields, so the FieldCache is populated
prior to any queries
Dynamically adding fields to schema is yet to get released..
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3251
We used dynamic field and copy field for dynamically creating facets...
We had too many dynamic fields (retrieved from a database table) and we had
to make sure that facets exists for
: Dynamically adding fields to schema is yet to get released..
:
: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3251
Just to clarify...
*explicitly* adding fields dynamicly based on client commands has been
implimented and will be included in Solr 4.4
*implicitly* adding fields dynamically
Hi,
I am thinking of using Solr to implement Search on our site. Here is my use
case,
1. We will have multiple 4-5 indexes based on different data
types/structures and data will be indexed into these by several processes,
like cron, on demand, thru message queue applications, etc.
2. A single
Great, thank you!
-Original Message-
From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_luc...@fucit.org]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:27 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Dynamically create new fields
: Dynamically adding fields to schema is yet to get released..
:
:
Manasi,
Everything hinges on these indexes having similar enough schema that they
can be represented as a union of all the fields from each type, where most
of the searched data is common to all types. If so, you have a few options
for querying them all together... distributed search, creating
Thanks for the reply Michael.
In some cases schema is similar but not all of them. So lets go with
assumption schema NOT being similar.
I am not quite sure what you mean by you're probably stuck coordinating the
results externally. Do you mean, searching in each index and then somehow
merge
Rerun the sorted query with debugQuery=true and look at the module timings.
See what stands out
Are you actually sorting on a text field, as opposed to a string field?
Of course, it's always possible that maybe you're hitting some odd OOM/GC
condition as a result of Solr growing between
I am not quite sure what you mean by you're probably stuck coordinating
the
results externally. Do you mean, searching in each index and then somehow
merge results manually? will I still be able to use shards parameters? or
no?
If your schemas don't match up, you can't use distributed
It worked ,i followed steps only difference i erased everything and started
from scratch again
From: kalyan.ku...@live.com
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Solr Shards and ZooKeeper
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:51:41 -0400
Hi allI am trying to configure external zookeeper with solr
Is this a limitation of solr/lucene, should I be considering using other
option like using Elasticsearch (which is also based on lucene)?
But I am sure search in multiple indexes is kind of a common problem.
Also, i as reading this post
Thanks for the responses.
Setting first/newSearcher had no noticeable effect. I'm sorting on a
stored/indexed field named 'text' who's fieldType is solr.TextField.
Overall, the values of the field are unique. The JVM is only using about
2G of the available 12G, so no OOM/GC issue (at least on
I had not heard of that technique before. Interesting!
But couldn't you do the same thing with a unified schema spread among your
cores?
Michael Della Bitta
Applications Developer
o: +1 646 532 3062 | c: +1 917 477 7906
appinions inc.
“The Science of Influence Marketing”
18 East 41st
I have solved this problem and able work with CachedSqlEntityProcessor
successfully after a very long struggle.
I tried this on 4.2.
There are still existing bugs it seems:
1. What ever you mention in cacheKey, that field name must in the select
statement explicitly.
2. If I am correct, the
In my case, different teams will be updating indexes at different intervals
so having separate cores gives more control. However, I can still
update(add/edit/delete) data with conditions like check for doc type.
Its just that, using shards sounds much cleaner and readable.
However, I am not yet
Michael's point was that the schema need to be compatible. I mean, if you
query fields A, B, C, and D, and index1 has fields A and B, while index2 has
fields C and D, and index3 has fields E and F, what kind of results do you
think you will get back?!
Whether the schemas must be identical is
Hello,
I’m attempting to figure out what’s required for my Solr implementation to
dynamically create new cores based on a template set of config files.
My plan is to use this “template” directory as the instance directory for
multiple cores, while maintaining a separate data directory for
bbarani:
Where did you see this? I haven't seen it before and I get an error on
startup if I add validate=false to a field definition
Thanks,
Erick
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:33 PM, bbarani bbar...@gmail.com wrote:
I think if you use validate=false in schema.xml, field or dynamicField
But see Steve Rowe's comments at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4641 and use custom child
properties as:
field indexed=true multiValued=true name=f1 stored=true type=string
MYPARAMVALUE/MYPARAM !-- Maven property style --
custom MYPARAM=VALUE/ !-- Alternative syntax; element name
Discovery should be out with 4.4
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Upayavira u...@odoko.co.uk wrote:
What you are doing by removing solr.xml is reverting to the old Solr 3.x
'single core' setup. Erick is suggesting that this is best considered
deprecated, and will make life harder for you with
Just to pile on, transaction logs do use up some memory, but it does
NOT store the whole document in memory, docs are flushed to the tlog
on disk. What is kept in memory is some basic doc info (unique id?)
and a pointer to that doc in memory, so not much really unless you're
keeping a boatload of
Questions:
What does your Solr admin page say?
Did you commit after you indexed the doc?
What is your evidence that a search fails?
You might review:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
Best
Erick
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 5:16 AM, sodoo first...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi all,
I am
This doesn't make much sense, particularly the fact
that you added first/new searchers. I'm assuming that
these are sorting on the same field as your slow query.
But sorting on a text field for which
Overall, the values of the field are unique
is a red-flag. Solr doesn't sort on fields that have
This is a know bug, see:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4862
Solr.xml persistence has several shortcomings. As
it happens I'm working on that right now, but the
results won't be ready until 4.4. I hope to get a patch
up over the weekend (SOLR-4910) and this is one
of the things I want
In 4.x and trunk is a close() method on Tokenizers and Filters. In
currently released up to 4.3, there is instead a reset(stream) method
which is how it resets a TokenizerFilter for a following document in
the same upload.
In both cases I had to track the first time the tokens are consumed,
Erick,
I agree, it doesn't make sense. I manually merged the solrconfig.xml from
the distribution example with my 3.6 solrconfig.xml, pulling out what I
didn't need. There is the possibility I removed something I shouldn't have
though I don't know what it would be. Minus removing the dynamic
Thank you for quick reply. I have solve the problem.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/document-indexing-tp3241832p4070116.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi Chris,
thanks for sharing the document. It is very helpful to have
an estimate of what is consuming the memory.
On 12 June 2013 10:47, Chris Morley ch...@depahelix.com wrote:
This might help (indirectly):
95 matches
Mail list logo
