Please, please, please do _not_ try to use core discovery to add new
replicas by manually editing stuff.
bq: and my deployment tools create an empty core on newly provisioned machines.
This is a really bad idea (as you have discovered). Basically, your
deployment tools have to do everything
Thank you everyone for your comments and recommendations. Will consider all
these points in my implementation.
Regards,
Edwin
On 27 May 2015 at 05:15, Walter Underwood wun...@wunderwood.org wrote:
On May 26, 2015, at 7:10 AM, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo edwinye...@gmail.com
wrote:
We want the user
I'm using ExtractingRequestHandler to do the indexing. Do I have to
implement the UpdateProcessor method at the ExtractingRequestHandler or as
a separate method?
Regards,
Edwin
On 26 May 2015 at 23:42, Alessandro Benedetti benedetti.ale...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think this is still in topic,
Yes it could be :)
Anyway thanks for helping.
With Regards
Aman Tandon
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:22 PM, Alessandro Benedetti
benedetti.ale...@gmail.com wrote:
I should investigate that, as usually synonyms are analysis stage.
A simple way is to replace the word with all its synonyms (
Thank you so much Ahmet :)
With Regards
Aman Tandon
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi Aman,
Start with creating a jira account and vote/watch that issue.
Post on the issue to see if there is still interest on this.
Declare that you will be volunteer
I tried to follow the example here
https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UpdateRequestProcessor, by putting
the updateRequestProcessorChain in my solrconfig.xml
But I'm getting the following error when I tried to reload the core.
Caused by: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Error loading class
Our index has almost 100M documents running on SolrCloud of 5 shards and
each shard has an index size of about 170+GB (for the record, we are not
using stored fields - our documents are pretty large). We perform a full
indexing every weekend and during the week there are no updates made to the
Hi Edwin,
Somehow, it is not recommended to display the relevancy score in percentage:
https://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ScoresAsPercentages
Ahmet
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 8:34 AM, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo edwinye...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
Would like to check, does the new version of Solr allows
For my EmbeddedSolr-mode I do
...
System.setProperty( solr.allow.unsafe.resourceloading, true );
...
which works fine.
For the remote-mode, i.e. Solr/jetty server I put
SOLR_OPTS=$SOLR_OPTS -Dsolr.allow.unsafe.resourceloading=true
into solr.in.sh. Unfortunately this setting/option does not seem
Hi Arslan,
Thank you for the link. That means we are not advisable to show anything
that's related to the relevancy score, even though the default sorting of
the result is by relevancy score? Since showing the raw relevancy score
does not make any sense to the user since they won't understand
The result that Solr returns is the document, not anything beneath, so
no, you cannot do this.
You could use highlighting, you could parse the output of explains
(debug.explains.structured=true will help) to identify which field
triggered the match. Alternatively, you could use block joins. Make
Why is your app tied that closely to Solr? I can understand if you are
talking about SolrJ, but normal usage you use a different application in
a different JVM from Solr.
Upayavira
On Tue, May 26, 2015, at 05:14 AM, Robust Links wrote:
I am stuck in Yet Another Jarmagedon of SOLR. this is a
Correct. The relevancy score simply states that we think result #1 is
more relevant than result #2. It doesn't say that #1 is relevant.
The score doesn't have any validity across queries either, as, for
example, a different number of query terms will cause the score to
change.
Upayavira
On Tue,
Dear List,
In my schema I have a couple multi value fields and I would need to retrive
the index of which one generated a match. For example let's suppose I have
a text field like this with three values:
MyField:
[0] Red
[1] Blue
[2] Green
Searching for Blue gets me the document, but I would
Hi,
Erick you mentioned about a unit test to test the optimize running in
background. Kindly share your findings if any.
Thanks,
Modassar
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Modassar Ather modather1...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks everybody for your replies.
I have noticed the optimization running
Hi,
We have some field *city* in which the docValues are enabled. We need to
add the synonym in that field so how could we do it?
With Regards
Aman Tandon
i have custom search components.
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 4:34 AM, Upayavira u...@odoko.co.uk wrote:
Why is your app tied that closely to Solr? I can understand if you are
talking about SolrJ, but normal usage you use a different application in
a different JVM from Solr.
Upayavira
On Tue,
The question is more why do you want your users to see the scores?
If they are wanting to affect ranking, what you want is the ability to run
the same query with different boosting and see the difference (2 result
sets), then see if the new ordering is better or worse. What the
actual/raw score
I guess this is one reason why the whole WAR approach is being removed!
Solr should be a black-box that you talk to, and get responses from. What
it depends on and how it is deployed, should be irrelevant to you.
If you are wanting to override the version of guava that Solr uses, then
you'd have
To my understanding, docValues are just an uninverted index. That is, it
contains the terms that are generated at the end of an analysis chain.
Therefore, you simply enable docValues and include the
SynonymFilterFactory in your analysis.
Is that enough, or are you struggling with some other
Modassar,
Are you saying that the reason you are optimising is because you have
been doing it for years? If this is the only reason, you should stop
doing it immediately.
The one scenario in which optimisation still makes some sense is when
you reindex every night and optimise straight after.
No, not really. Creating your own components that extend Solr is quite
acceptable - they can live in the Solr Home lib directory outside of the
war.
But really, if you are coding within Solr, you really need to use the
libraries that Solr uses. Or... create a JIRA ticket and help to upgrade
Solr
Hi,
Is there a way to remove the special characters like \n during indexing of
the rich text documents.
I have quite alot of leading \n \n in front of my indexed content of rich
text documents due to the space and empty lines with the original
documents, and it's causing the content to be
On Tue, May 26, 2015, at 02:20 PM, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo wrote:
Hi,
Is there a way to remove the special characters like \n during indexing
of
the rich text documents.
I have quite alot of leading \n \n in front of my indexed content of rich
text documents due to the space and empty
How you have tie is fine. Setting tie to 1 might give you reasonable
results. You could easily still have scores that are just always an order
of magnitude or two higher, but try it out!
BTW Anything you put in teh URL can also be put into a request handler.
If you ever just want to have a 15
mmm this is different !
Without any customisation, right now you could :
- use docValues to provide exact value facets.
- Than you can use a copy field, with the proper analysis, to search when a
user click on a filter !
So you will see in your facets :
Mumbai(3)
Bombay(2)
And when clicking you
Thanks Erick for your willingness and patience,
if I understood well when autoCommit with openSearcher=true at first commit
(soft or hard) all new documents will be automatically available for search.
But when openSearcher=false, the commit will flush recent index changes to
stable storage, but
Neither - it removes the characters before indexing. The distinction is
that if you remove them during indexing they will still appear in the
stored field values even if they are removed from the indexed values, but
by removing them before indexing, they will not appear in the stored field
values.
I am using NSSM to start zookeeper as a service on windows (and for Solr too).
in NSSM I configured it to just point to to
E:\zookeeper-3.4.6\bin\zkServer.cmd.
As long as you can run that from the command line to validate that you have
modified all of the zookeeper config files correctly,
We had a similar problem, when searching we wanted to return the doc, and
for the multi-valued field we wanted to show only the value that matched
the search.
This was used for an advanced auto suggestion.
As Upaya specified, Highlighting was the good solution for us.
Managing in the UI only the
Thx. When will 5.2 approximately be released?
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Timothy Potter [mailto:thelabd...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 26. Mai 2015 17:50
An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Solr 5.1 ignores SOLR_JAVA_MEM setting
Yes, same bug. Fixed in 5.2
On Tue, May
Hi Ahmet,
Can you please guide me to contribute for this *issue*. I haven't did this
before.
So I need to know...what should I need to know and how should I start..what
IDE or whatever you thought is need to know for a novice. I will be
thankful to you :)
With Regards
Aman Tandon
On Tue, May
Hi Edwin,
Are there changes you recommend to bin/solr.cmd to make it easier to
work with NSSM? If so, please file a JIRA as I'd like to help make
that process easier.
Thanks.
Tim
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:34 AM, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo
edwinye...@gmail.com wrote:
I've managed to get the Solr
Okay So how could I do it with UpdateProcessors?
With Regards
Aman Tandon
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:00 PM, Alessandro Benedetti
benedetti.ale...@gmail.com wrote:
mmm this is different !
Without any customisation, right now you could :
- use docValues to provide exact value facets.
- Than
Honeslty the only case where the score in percentage could make sense, is
for the More Like This.
In that case Solr should provide that feature as we perfectly know that the
100 % similar score is a copy of the seed document.
If I am right, because of the MLT implementation, not taking care of
No results yet. I finished the test harness last night (not really a
unit test, a stand-alone program that endlessly adds stuff and tests
that every commit returns the correct number of docs).
8,000 cycles later there aren't any problems reported.
Siiigh.
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 1:51 AM,
I think this is still in topic,
Assuming we are using the Extract Update handler, I think the update
processor approach still applies.
But is it not possible to strip them directly with some extract request
handler param?
2015-05-26 16:33 GMT+01:00 Jack Krupansky jack.krupan...@gmail.com:
I checked in the Documentation to be sure, but apparently :
DocValues are only available for specific field types. The types chosen
determine the underlying Lucene docValue type that will be used. The
available Solr field types are:
- StrField and UUIDField.
- If the field is single-valued
I should investigate that, as usually synonyms are analysis stage.
A simple way is to replace the word with all its synonyms ( including
original word), but simply using this kind of processor will change the
token position and offsets, modifying the actual content of the document .
I am from
Hi Aman,
Start with creating a jira account and vote/watch that issue.
Post on the issue to see if there is still interest on this.
Declare that you will be volunteer and ask kindly for guidance.
Creator of the issue or one the watchers may respond.
Try to digest ideas discussed on the issue.
Good call.
I'd previously attempted to use one of my fields, however, and it didn't
work. I then thought maybe broadening it to list anything could help. I'd
tried using the interestingTerms parameter as well.
Just for the sake of double checking before replying to your message,
though, I
On 5/20/2015 12:06 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar wrote:
Sounds similar to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6165 which I
fixed in 4.10. Can you try a newer release?
Looks like that didn't fix it.
I applied the patch on SOLR-6165 to the lucene_solr_4_9_1 tag, built a
new war, and when it
I have added a patch which should fix the problem.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7559
Please review.
Cheers,
Jeroen
-Original Message-
From: Jeroen Steggink [mailto:jeroen.stegg...@contentstrategy.nl]
Sent: dinsdag 26 mei 2015 21:45
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject:
I doubt mlt.fl=* will work. Provide it with specific field names that
should be used for the comparison.
Upayavira
On Tue, May 26, 2015, at 08:17 PM, John Blythe wrote:
hi all,
running a query like this, but am getting no results from the mlt
handler:
Just checked my schema.xml and think that the issue is resulting from the
stored property being set false on descript2 and true on descript.
--
*John Blythe*
Product Manager Lead Developer
251.605.3071 | j...@curvolabs.com
www.curvolabs.com
58 Adams Ave
Evansville, IN 47713
On Tue, May 26,
Hi Bjorn,
Not 100% sure but, ICUFoldingFilter may suit for you.
It also removes diacritics.
ahmet
On Thursday, May 21, 2015 3:20 PM, Björn Keil greifenschwi...@yahoo.de wrote:
Thanks for the advice. I have tried the field type and it seems to do what it
is supposed to in combination with a
On 5/26/2015 8:10 AM, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo wrote:
We want the user to see how relevant the result is with respect to the
search query entered, and not how good the results are.
But I suspect a problem is that the 1st record will always be 100%,
regardless of what is the score, as the 1st record
I'm experimenting with Solr5 (5.1.0 1672403 - timpotter - 2015-04-09
10:37:54). In my custom DIH, I use a RegExTransformer to load several
columns, which may or may not be present. If present, the regexp
matches and the data loads correctly in both Solr4 and 5. If not present
and the regexp
hi all,
running a query like this, but am getting no results from the mlt handler:
http://localhost:8983/solr/parts/select?q=mfgname2%3A+Acme
Corp+descript2%3A+(SCREW+3.5X50MM)start=0rows=1fl=*%2C+scorewt=jsonindent=truemlt=truemlt.fl=*mlt.mintf=1mlt.mindf=1mlt.minwl=1
been googling around
Hi Tim,
I just ran into the exact same problem.
I see you created a bug in JIRA. I will check what is causing this and try and
fix it.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7559
Jeroen
-Original Message-
From: Tim H [mailto:th98...@gmail.com]
Sent: maandag 18 mei 2015 17:28
To:
Thanks Doug. I might have to take you on the hangout offer. Let me refine
the requirement further and if I still see the need, I will let you know.
Steve
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Doug Turnbull
dturnb...@opensourceconnections.com wrote:
How you have tie is fine. Setting tie to 1
Probably in the next week or so. The branch has been cut, the release
is being put together/tested/finalized with the usual process.
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Clemens Wyss DEV clemens...@mysign.ch wrote:
Thx. When will 5.2 approximately be released?
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
On 5/26/2015 2:37 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
On 5/20/2015 12:06 AM, Shalin Shekhar Mangar wrote:
Sounds similar to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6165 which I
fixed in 4.10. Can you try a newer release?
Looks like that didn't fix it.
I applied the patch on SOLR-6165 to the
right, autoCommit (in solrconfig.xml) will
1 close the current Lucene segments and open a new one
2 close the tlog and start a new one.
Those actions are independent of whether openSearcher=true or false.
if (and only if) openSearcher=true, then the commits will be
immediately visible to a query.
If the source document is in your index (i.e. not passed in via
stream.body) then the fields used will either need to be stored or have
term vectors enabled. The latter is more performant.
Upayavira
On Tue, May 26, 2015, at 09:24 PM, John Blythe wrote:
Just checked my schema.xml and think that
On May 26, 2015, at 7:10 AM, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo edwinye...@gmail.com wrote:
We want the user to see how relevant the result is with respect to the
search query entered, and not how good the results are.
That is the meaning of the score from a probabilistic model search engine. Solr
is not a
Hi,
I have a SolrCloud setup, running 4.10.3. The setup consists of several cores,
each with a single shard and initially each shard has a single replica (so,
basically, one machine). I am using core discovery, and my deployment tools
create an empty core on newly provisioned machines.
The
Run whatever tests you want with 14.0.1, replace it with 18.0, rerun the tests
and compare.
François
On May 26, 2015, at 10:25 AM, Robust Links pey...@robustlinks.com wrote:
by dumping you mean recompiling solr with guava 18?
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:22 AM, François Schiettecatte
What I am suggesting is that you set up a stand alone version of solr with
14.0.1 and run some sort of test suite similar to what you would normally use
solr for in your app. The replace the guava jar and re-run the tests. If all
works well, and I suspect it will because it did for me, then you
We want the user to see how relevant the result is with respect to the
search query entered, and not how good the results are.
But I suspect a problem is that the 1st record will always be 100%,
regardless of what is the score, as the 1st record score will always be
equals to the maxScore.
I'm not aware of a way you can do this, other than upgrading the Guava
in Solr itself.
Or rather, you'd need to create your own classloader and load your own
instance of Guava using that rather than the default classloader. That's
possible, but would be rather ugly and complex.
I'd say research
Have you tried dumping guava 14.0.1 and using 18.0 with Solr? I did a while ago
and it worked fine for me.
François
On May 26, 2015, at 10:11 AM, Robust Links pey...@robustlinks.com wrote:
i have a minhash logic that uses guava 18.0 method that is not in guava
14.0.1. This minhash logic is
It is showing up in the search results. Just to confirm, does this
UpdateProcessor method remove the characters during indexing or only after
indexing has been done?
Regards,
Edwin
On 26 May 2015 at 21:30, Upayavira u...@odoko.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2015, at 02:20 PM, Zheng Lin Edwin
Currently I've take the score that I get from Solr, and divide it by the
maxScore, and multiply it by 100 to get the percentage. All these are done
on the coding for the UI. The user will only see the percentage and will
not know anything about the score. Since the score by itself is
meaningless,
by dumping you mean recompiling solr with guava 18?
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:22 AM, François Schiettecatte
fschietteca...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you tried dumping guava 14.0.1 and using 18.0 with Solr? I did a
while ago and it worked fine for me.
François
On May 26, 2015, at 10:11 AM,
i can't run 14.0.1. that is the problem. 14 does not have the interfaces i
need
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:28 AM, François Schiettecatte
fschietteca...@gmail.com wrote:
Run whatever tests you want with 14.0.1, replace it with 18.0, rerun the
tests and compare.
François
On May 26, 2015,
On 5/26/2015 6:29 AM, Upayavira wrote:
Are you saying that the reason you are optimising is because you have
been doing it for years? If this is the only reason, you should stop
doing it immediately.
The one scenario in which optimisation still makes some sense is when
you reindex every
I also noticed that (see my post this morning)
...
SOLR_OPTS=$SOLR_OPTS -Dsolr.allow.unsafe.resourceloading=true
...
Is not taken into consideration (anymore). Same bug?
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Ere Maijala [mailto:ere.maij...@helsinki.fi]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. April 2015 09:25
i have a minhash logic that uses guava 18.0 method that is not in guava
14.0.1. This minhash logic is a separate maven project. I'm including it in
my project via maven.the code is being used as a search component on the
set of results. The logic goes through the search results and deletes
I completely agree with Upayavira and Shawn.
Modassar, can you explain us how often do you index ?
Have you ever played with the merge Factor ?
I hardly think you need to optimise at all.
Simply a tuning of the merge Factor should solve all your issues .
I assume you were optimising only to have
Hello
I have a weird SOLR problem with object creation from a date function query
against a TrieDate field in my index called ds.
This boost function
bf=min(div(ms(NOW/HOUR,ds),60480),26)
causes many millions of FunctionQuery objects to be created in memory. When I
change
We are interested in using docValues for better memory utilization and
speed.
Currently we are faceting the search results on *city. *In city we have
also added the synonym for cities like mumbai, bombay (These are Indian
cities). So that result of mumbai is also eligible when somebody will
Yes, same bug. Fixed in 5.2
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Clemens Wyss DEV clemens...@mysign.ch wrote:
I also noticed that (see my post this morning)
...
SOLR_OPTS=$SOLR_OPTS -Dsolr.allow.unsafe.resourceloading=true
...
Is not taken into consideration (anymore). Same bug?
This is one of those things that is, IMO, strictly a feel good thing
that's sometimes insisted upon
by the product manager and all the information in the world about
this is really meaningless falls
on deaf ears.
If you simply have no choice (a position I've been because it wasn't
worth the
Hi Doug,
I'm back to this topic. Unfortunately, due to my DB structer, and business
need, I will not be able to search against a single field (i.e.: using
copyField). Thus, I have to use list of fields via qf. Given this, I
see you said above to use tie=1.0 will that, more or less, address
75 matches
Mail list logo
