I have not added any timeout in the indexer except zk client time out which
is 30 seconds. I am simply calling client.close() at the end of indexing.
The same code was not running in background for optimize with solr-4.10.3
and org.apache.solr.client.solrj.impl.CloudSolrServer.
On Fri, May 29, 201
Hi,
I want to debug the whole indexing process, the life cycle of indexing
process (each and every function call by going via function to function),
from the posting of the data.xml to creation of various index files ( _fnm,
_fdt, etc ). So how/what should I setup and start, please help. I will be
Are you timing out on the client request? The theory here is that it's
still a synchronous call, but you're just timing out at the client
level. At that point, the optimize is still running it's just the
connection has been dropped
Shot in the dark.
Erick
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:31 PM, Mod
I could not notice it but with my past experience of commit which used to
take around 2 minutes is now taking around 8 seconds. I think this is also
running as background.
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Modassar Ather
wrote:
> The indexer takes almost 2 hours to optimize. It has a multi-threa
The indexer takes almost 2 hours to optimize. It has a multi-threaded add
of batches of documents to
org.apache.solr.client.solrj.impl.CloudSolrClient.
Once all the documents are indexed it invokes commit and optimize. I have
seen that the optimize goes into background after 10 minutes and indexer
I've tried to use the site. I saw that when I search for Matex, it actually
only gives a boost of 0.8 to the word Latex as it is not the main word that
is search, but I still can't understand why the score can be so high?
This is what I get from the output explanation:
{
-
- "match": true,
Hi,
I'm trying to increase the number of cluster result to be shown during the
search. I tried to set carrot.fragSize=20 but only 15 cluster labels is
shown. Even when I tried to set carrot.fragSize=5, there's also 15 labels
shown.
Is this the correct way to do this? I understand that setting it
Hi Timothy,
I don't really have much of a good recommendation. Basically I've written a
batch file which will call the solr.cmd with all the setting like heap size
and enable clustering, and I point the path in the NSSM to this batch file.
If I just point it directly to solr.cmd, I not sure if the
Hi Miller,
Yes, I managed to get the zookeeper to start as a service on Windows in
Windows 8 running Java 8. However, it didn't work on Windows Server 2008 R2
(SP1) when I upgrade the Java to Java 8. It is able to work when the server
is running on Java 7.
Regards,
Edwin
On 26 May 2015 at 23:5
Thanks chris.
Yes we are using it for handling multiword synonym problem.
With Regards
Aman Tandon
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:38 AM, Reitzel, Charles <
charles.reit...@tiaa-cref.org> wrote:
> Again, I would recommend using Nolan Lawson's
> SynonymExpandingExtendedDismaxQParserPlugin.
>
> http:/
Hi Folks,
First, thanks for taking the time to read and reply to this subject, it is
much appreciated, I have yet to come up with a final solution that
optimizes Solr. To give you more context, let me give you the big picture
of how the application and the database is structured for which I'm try
Charles:
You raise good points, and I didn't mean to say that co-locating docs
due to some critera was never a good idea. That said, it does add
administrative complexity that I'd prefer to avoid unless necessary.
I suppose it largely depends on what the load and response SLAs are.
If there's 1 q
First, there isn't that I know of. But why would you want to do this?
On the face of it, it makes no sense to ignore the doc cache. One of its
purposes is to hold the document (read off disk) for successive
search components _in the same query_. Otherwise, each component
might have to do a disk se
On 5/28/2015 3:08 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> Because we are planning a change on this field in the database to
> decimal, I tried changing the price field on both solr servers to double
> -- TrieDoubleField with precisionStep set to 0. This didn't fix the
> problem. Dev was still fine, production
: i'm not sure i follow what you're saying on #3. let me clarify in case it's
: on my end. i was wanting to *eventually* set a lower bound of -10%size1 and
: an upper of +10%size1. for the sake of experimentation i started with just
lower bound "of what" ?
write out the math equation you want to
Here's the error I am getting on Solr 4.9.1 on a production server:
ERROR - 2015-05-28 14:39:13.449; org.apache.solr.common.SolrException;
org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: ERROR: [doc=getty36914013] Error
adding field 'price'='0.0' msg=For input string: "0.0"
On a dev server, everything is f
i'm not sure i follow what you're saying on #3. let me clarify in case it's
on my end. i was wanting to *eventually* set a lower bound of -10%size1 and
an upper of +10%size1. for the sake of experimentation i started with just
the lower bound. i didn't care (at that point) about the results, just
g
: 2) lame :\
Why do you say that? ... it's a practical limitation -- for each document
a function is computed, and then the result of that function is compared
against the (fixed) upper and lower bounds.
In situations where you want the something like the lower bound of the
range comparison t
We have used a similar sharding strategy for exactly the reasons you say. But
we are fairly certain that the # of documents per user ID is < 5000 and,
typically, <500. Thus, we think the overhead of distributed searches clearly
outweighs the benefits. Would you agree? We have done some l
In the velocity directory you'll find the templates that implement all
this stuff, I usually copy/paste. Do understand that this is _demo_
code, not an "official" UI for Solr so it's rather a case of digging
in and experimenting.
I would _not_ use this (or anything else that gave direct access to
Is there a way to the document cache on a per-query basis?
It looks like theres {!cache=false} for preventing the filter cache from
being used for a given query, looking for the same thing for the document
cache.
Thanks,
Bryan
I would reconsider the strategy of mashing so many different record types
into one Solr collection. Sure, you get some advantage from denormalizing
data, but if the downside cost gets too high, it may not make so much sense.
I'd consider a collection per record type, or at least group similar reco
1) ooo, i see
2) lame :\
3) right. i hadn't bothered with the upper limit yet simply for sake of
less complexity / chance to fk it up. wanted to get the function working
for lower before worrying about adding u= and getting the query refined
4) very good point about just doing it client side. i kno
Hi
I tried to use the UI Velocity from Solr.
Could you please help in the following:
- how do I define the fields from my schema that I would like to be
displayed as facet in the UI?
Thanks!
Benjamin
Still, it seems like the right direction.
Does it "smell" ok to have a few hundred request handlers?Again, my logic
is that if any given view requires no more than 50 fields, one request handler
per view would work. This is different than a request handler per user
category (which requ
Again, I would recommend using Nolan Lawson's
SynonymExpandingExtendedDismaxQParserPlugin.
http://nolanlawson.com/2012/10/31/better-synonym-handling-in-solr/
-Original Message-
From: Aman Tandon [mailto:amantandon...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 6:42 PM
To: solr-user@luc
: Expected identifier at pos 29 str='{!frange l=sum(size1, product(size1,
: .10))}size1
:
: pos 29 is the open parenthesis of product(). can i not use a function
: within a function? or is there something else i'm missing in the way i'm
: constructing this?
1) you're confusing the parser by tryi
doh!
1) silly me, i knew better but was getting tunnel visioned
2) moved to fq and am now getting this error:
Expected identifier at pos 29 str='{!frange l=sum(size1, product(size1,
.10))}size1
pos 29 is the open parenthesis of product(). can i not use a function
within a function? or is there so
You could use local params with a filter query and specify multiple mm in
each local param. Here's an example for our VA State Laws Solr (you're free
to poke around with). Here I only allow search results that have mm=1 on
catch_line (a title field) and mm=2 for text field.
http://solr.quepid.co
Please follow instructions here: http://lucene.apache.org/solr/resources.html
Be sure to use the exact e-mail address you originally subscribed with.
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Nirali Mehta wrote:
> Unsubscribe
: certainly didn't intend to write it like this!). The problem here will
: be that CoreDescriptors are currently built entirely from
: core.properties files, and the CoreLocators that construct them don't
: have any access to zookeeper.
But they do have access to the CoreContainer which is pa
Unsubscribe
: Never even considered loading core.properties from ZK, so not even an
: oversight on my part ;)
to be very clear -- we're not talking about core.properties.
we're talking about solrcore.properties -- the file that's existed for
much longer then core.properites (predates both solrcloud and
fq, not fl.
fq is "filter query"
fl is the "field list", the stored fields to be returned to the user.
Best,
Erick
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:03 AM, John Blythe wrote:
> I've set the field to be processed as such:
>
>
> and then have this in the fl box in Solr admin UI:
> *, score, {!frange l=s
: Subject: Per field mm parameter
:
: How to specify per field mm parameter in edismax query.
you can't.
the mm param applies to the number of minimum match clauses in the final
query, where each of those clauses is a disjunction over each of the
qf fields.
this blog might help explain the q
Please follow the instructions here:
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/resources.html. Be sure to use the exact
same e-mail you used to subscribe.
Best,
Erick
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Stefan Meise - SONIC Performance
Support wrote:
>
Gotta agree with Jack here. This is an insane number of fields, query
performance on any significant corpus will be "fraught" etc. The very
first thing I'd look at is having that many fields. You have 3,500
different fields! Whatever the motivation for having that many fields
is the place I'd start
I've set the field to be processed as such:
and then have this in the fl box in Solr admin UI:
*, score, {!frange l=sum(size1, product(size1, .10))}size1
I'm trying to use the size1 field as the item upon which a frange is being
used, but also need to use the size1 value for the mathematical fun
Never even considered loading core.properties from ZK, so not even an
oversight on my part ;)
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Alan Woodward wrote:
> I think this is an oversight, rather than intentional (at least, I certainly
> didn't intend to write it like this!). The problem here will
Seems like you should be able to use the ManagedStopFilterFactory with
a custom StorageIO impl that pulls from your db:
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/5_1_0/solr-core/index.html?org/apache/solr/rest/ManagedResourceStorage.StorageIO.html
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 7:03 AM, Alessandro Benedetti
wrote:
5.x will still build a war file that you an deploy on Tomcat. But
support for that is going away eventually, certainly by 6.0. But you
do have to make the decision sometime before 6.0 at least.
Best,
Erick
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Vishal Swaroop wrote:
> Thanks a lot Erick... great input
You need to translate your source data size into number of documents and
document size. Document size will depend on number of fields, the type of
data in each field, and the size of the data in each field. You need to
think about numeric and date fields, raw string fields, and keyword text
fields.
Works as expected :)
Thanks guys!
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Native-library-of-plugin-is-loaded-for-every-core-tp4207996p4208372.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
this site has been a great help to me in seeing how things shake out as far
as the scores are concerned: http://splainer.io/
--
*John Blythe*
Product Manager & Lead Developer
251.605.3071 | j...@curvolabs.com
www.curvolabs.com
58 Adams Ave
Evansville, IN 47713
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:06 AM,
You explain parameter and it should show you the scores and the calculations
Sent from my Fire
On May 28, 2015, at 10:06 AM, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo wrote:
Hi,
Does anyone knows how Solr does its scoring with a query that has proximity
search enabled.
For example, when I issue a query q=Matex~1,
Hi,
Does anyone knows how Solr does its scoring with a query that has proximity
search enabled.
For example, when I issue a query q=Matex~1, the result with the top score
that came back was actually 'Latex', and with a score of 2.27. This is with
the fact that there are several documents in my in
Hi everyone
I am using the UIMA DictionaryAnnotator to tag Solr documents. It seems to
be working (I do get tags), but I get some strange behavior:
1. I am using the White Space Tokenizer both for the indexed text and for
creating the dictionary. Most entries in my dictionary consist of multiple
Hi,
*Problem Statement: *query -> "i need leather jute bags"
If we are searching on the *title *field using the pf2 (
*server:8003/solr/core0/select?q=i%20need%20leather%20jute%20bags&pf2=titlex&debug=query&defType=edismax&wt=xml&rows=0*).
Currently it will create the shingled phrases like "i nee
A classic on the importance of prototyping with your data and on the
intractability of sizing in the abstract:
https://lucidworks.com/blog/sizing-hardware-in-the-abstract-why-we-dont-have-a-definitive-answer/
This might be of use:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/dev/trunk/dev-tools/s
Hi Tommaso
Thanks for the quick reply! I have another question about using the
Dictionary Annotator, but I guess it's better to post it separately.
Cheers
Andreea
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/solr-uima-and-opennlp-tp4206873p4208348.html
Sent from the Sol
As Alex initially specified , the custom stop filter factory is the right
way !
So is mainly related to the suggester ?
Anyway with a custom stop filter, it can be possible and actually can be a
nice contribution as well.
Cheers
2015-05-28 13:01 GMT+01:00 Rupali :
> sylkaalex gmail.com> write
This does not even pass a basic smell test for reasonability of matching
the capabilities of Solr and the needs of your application. I'd like to
hear from others, but I personally would be -1 on this approach to misusing
qf. I'd simply say that you need to go back to the drawing board, and that
you
How to specify per field mm parameter in edismax query.
-
Nutch Solr User
"The ultimate search engine would basically understand everything in the world,
and it would always give you the right thing."
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Per-field-mm-paramet
Hi Charles,
That is what I have done. At the moment, I have 22 request handlers, some
have 3490 field items in "qf" (that's the most and the qf line spans over
95,000 characters in solrconfig.xml file) and the least one has 1341
fields. I'm working on seeing if I can use copyField to copy the da
sylkaalex gmail.com> writes:
>
> The main goal to allow each user use own stop words list. For example
user
> type "th"
> now he will see next results in his terms search:
> the
> the one
> the then
> then
> then and
>
> But user has stop word "the" and he want get next results:
> then
> then
Thank you Alessandro.
With Regards
Aman Tandon
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Alessandro Benedetti <
benedetti.ale...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Aman,
> this feature can be interesting for you :
>
> > Shard Splitting
> >
> > When you create a collection in SolrCloud, you decide on the initial
> >
I think this is an oversight, rather than intentional (at least, I certainly
didn't intend to write it like this!). The problem here will be that
CoreDescriptors are currently built entirely from core.properties files, and
the CoreLocators that construct them don't have any access to zookeeper.
Hi Aman,
this feature can be interesting for you :
> Shard Splitting
>
> When you create a collection in SolrCloud, you decide on the initial
> number shards to be used. But it can be difficult to know in advance the
> number of shards that you need, particularly when organizational
> requirements
59 matches
Mail list logo
