Done.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:58 AM, Christian Marquardt
christianmarqua...@gmx.net wrote:
Hi,
please add me to the contributers group.
Username: ChristianMarquardt https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ChristianMarquardt
Best Regards
Christian
Beste Grüße
Christian Marquardt
Tannenweg
First, if master/slave suits our use-case, there's no reason to go to
SolrCloud.
However, the following are some of the things you get with SolrCloud:
1 automatic document routing (irrelevant if you don't have enough
docs to need more than one shard)
2 automatic fail-over/recovery if nodes go
Solr version 4.2.1
In my schema, I have text type defined as follows:
---
fieldType name=text class=solr.TextField
positionIncrementGap=100
analyzer type=index
tokenizer class=solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory/
filter class=solr.StopFilterFactory words=stopwords.txt
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Arun Rangarajan
arunrangara...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
This query
q=name:ofrows=0
gives no results as expected.
However, this query:
q=name:of AND all_class_ids:(371)rows=0
gives results and is equal to the same number of results as
Query parsing is not strict boolean logic, this trips up many people
even though AND, NOT and OR are used. See:
https://lucidworks.com/blog/why-not-and-or-and-not/
I think what you've really got at the top level is a single MUST
clause, namely all_class_ids:(371).
What is _not_ happening here is
Hey guys, I have a desire to order (field) facets by their order of
appearance in the search results.
When I first thought about it, I figured there would be some way to plug a
custom Comparator into FacetComponent and link it to facet.sort=rank or
something like that, but not only is there no
I guess my first question is why you're splitting up your shards this way. You
may have very good reasons, but as you outline, a huge amount of your work is
on a single shard.
Is it even possible to spread docs randomly instead, thus spread the load
over the entire cluster rather than the hot
There's a vote going on for the 3rd release candidate of Solr / Lucene 5.0.
If everything goes smooth and the vote passes, the release should happen in
about 4-5 days.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 10:09 PM, CKReddy Bhimavarapu chaitu...@gmail.com
wrote:
What is the anticipated release date for Solr
On 16 February 2015 at 19:12, Jack Krupansky jack.krupan...@gmail.com wrote:
In fact, it would be better to only remove stop words at query time
when they are not at either end of the query.
And how is that achieved in Solr? This sounds interesting but
stretches my knowledge of the available
So, I had set up a solr core modelled on the 'multicore' example in 4.10.3,
which has no /browse.
Upon request, I went to set up /browse.
I copied in a minimal version. When I go there, I just get some XML back:
response
lst name=responseHeader
int name=status0/int
int name=QTime4/int
lst
Notice that I said would be rather than is!
Yeah, Solr is basically broken WRT intelligent stop word handling, but
nobody wants to admit it. edismax does have some limited support for the
case of the query being all stop words, but that doesn't work for more
complex queries with operators and the
Well, there is CommonGrams and CommonGramsQuery filters (e.g.
http://www.solr-start.com/javadoc/solr-lucene/org/apache/lucene/analysis/commongrams/CommonGramsQueryFilter.html
). But I haven't seen them in use much.
If the description above (about the first/last token) would actually
be useful, it
Specifically what is happening is that the query parser passes of to the
analyzer for the name field, which removes the stopwords, including of,
which results in no term to be queried. A Lucene BooleanQuery with no terms
will match... nothing. But then when you add another clause, you have the
Velocity libraries and .vm templates as a first step! Did you get those setup?
Regards,
Alex.
Sign up for my Solr resources newsletter at http://www.solr-start.com/
On 16 February 2015 at 19:33, Benson Margulies ben...@basistech.com wrote:
So, I had set up a solr core modelled on the
I have been working with collations the last couple days and I kept adding the
collation-related parameters until it started working for me. It seems I
needed str name=spellcheck.collateMaxCollectDocs50/str.
But, I am using the Suggester with the WFSTLookupFactory.
Also, I needed to patch
We index lots of relatively small documents, minimum of around
6k/second, but up to 20k/second. At the same time we are deleting
400-900 documents a second. We have our shards organized by time, so
the bulk of our indexing happens in one 'hot' shard, but deletes can
go back in time to our epoch.
Dear Jack,
1. Look further down in the stack trace for the caused by that details
the specific cause of the exception.
I am still not able to find the cause of this.
2. Please explain in plain English what you are really trying to do with
this non-standard approach - why aren't you just
Hi All,
My master and slave index version and generation is the same
yet the index is not in sync because when I execute the same query
on both master and slave I see old docs on slave which should not be there.
I also tried to fetch a specific indexversion on slave using
What is the anticipated release date for Solr 5?
--
ckreddybh. chaitu...@gmail.com
Hi,
please add me to the contributers group.
Username: ChristianMarquardt https://wiki.apache.org/solr/ChristianMarquardt
Best Regards
Christian
Beste Grüße
Christian Marquardt
Tannenweg 43
86391 Stadtbergen
+49-179-9735764
christianmarqua...@gmx.net
20 matches
Mail list logo
