Oh, I am sorry, I totally forgot to mention our solr version, it's 7.7.3.
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Sebastian Riemer [mailto:s.rie...@littera.eu]
Gesendet: Freitag, 24. Juli 2020 09:53
An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Betreff: solr suggester.rebuild takes forever and eventually runs
500
true
suggest
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Sebastian Riemer, BSc
Dear community!
It works as suggested, either using
"-u_lastLendingDate_combined_ls_ns:[8610134693 TO 8611935823]"
or
"NOT u_lastLendingDate_combined_ls_ns:[8610134693 TO 8611935823]"
It seems that additional bracketing (as in the next line) does not harm my
query but I will eliminate it as
userName_cp_s^100 u_displayName_cp_s^20 text^10=100%
Thank you for your input and a nice weekend to all of you!
Please let me know if I did not share vital details!
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Sebastian Riemer, BSc
[logo_Littera_SC]<http://www.littera.eu/>
LITTERA Software & Consulting Gmb
to rename that field, that would help tremendously. Btw.
I am using Solr 6.5.1 and I use SolrJ in my ApplicationLayer.
Best regards and as always,
Thank you so much for any input!
Yours,
Sebastian
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Sebastian Riemer, BSc
[logo_Littera_SC]<http://www.littera.eu/>
L
> some crucial changes necessary when upgrading to 7.5.0?
>
> What about differing versions in SolrJ and Solr-Server? As far as I recall
> the docs, one major-version-difference up/down in both ways should be o.k.
>
> Thanks for all your feedback,
>
> Yours sincerely
>
> Sebastian Riemer
ays should be o.k.
Thanks for all your feedback,
Yours sincerely
Sebastian Riemer
Consider this situation,
I've got documents, for which I'll have to store multiple dates, those could be
access dates for example, or maybe "downloaded at"-dates or something similar.
So, a document might look like this:
{id:"1", name:"apache-solr-ref-guide-7.3.pdf",
org
Betreff: Re: Navigation/Paging
On 3/13/2018 10:26 AM, Sebastian Riemer wrote:
> However, now we want to introduce a similar navigation in our detail views,
> where only ever one document is displayed. Again, the navigation bar looks
> like this:
>
> << First < Pr
ill request the next 15.
When viewing the first of the 15, click previous, you will request the previous
15.
Am I missing something here?
Rick
On March 13, 2018 12:26:18 PM EDT, Sebastian Riemer <s.rie...@littera.eu> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>In our web app, when displaying result lists from s
Hi,
In our web app, when displaying result lists from solr, we've successfully
introduced paging via the params 'start' and 'rows' and it's working quite well.
Our navigation in list screens look like this:
<< First < Prev 1 - 15 of 62181 Next
Dear solr users,
I am considering to switch from SolrClient.execute to
SolrClient.queryAndStreamResponse, because I want to display the process of
query execution.
I've found http://stackoverflow.com/a/15810200/2747410 which seems to be a good
starting point for me.
However, the docs for
Dear solr users,
when updating documents in bulk (i.e. 40.000 documents at once), and only
changing the value of a single Boolean-Flag, I currently re-index all whole
40.000 objects. However, the process of obtaining all relevant information for
each object from the database is one of
Thanks @Toke, for pointing out these options. I'll have a read about
expungeDeletes.
Sounds even more so, that having solr filter out 0-counts is a good idea and I
should handle my use-case outside of solr.
Thanks again,
Sebastian
On Fri, 2017-01-13 at 14:19 +, Sebastian Riemer wrote
" won't
come up any more.
-Michael
Am 13.01.2017 um 15:36 schrieb Sebastian Riemer:
> Hi Bill,
>
> Thanks, that's actually where I come from. But I don't want to exclude values
> leading to a count of zero.
>
> Background to this: A user searched for mediaType "book&
m [mailto:billnb...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Freitag, 13. Januar 2017 15:23
An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: FacetField-Result on String-Field contains value with count 0?
Set mincount to 1
Bill Bell
Sent from mobile
> On Jan 13, 2017, at 7:19 AM, Sebastian Riemer <s.rie...@l
Pardon me,
the second search should have been this:
http://localhost:8983/solr/wemi/select?fq=m_mediaType_s:%221%22=on=*:*=0=0=json
(or in other words, give me all documents having value "1" for field
"m_mediaType_s")
Since this search gives zero results, why is it included in the
Hi,
Please help me understand:
http://localhost:8983/solr/wemi/select?facet.field=m_mediaType_s=on=on=*:*=json
returns:
"facet_counts":{
"facet_queries":{},
"facet_fields":{
"m_mediaType_s":[
"2",25561,
"3",19027,
"10",1966,
"11",1705,
ere -
https://github.com/mlibrary/umich_solr_library_filters
<https://github.com/mlibrary/umich_solr_library_filters>
- Erik
> On Jan 5, 2017, at 5:08 AM, Sebastian Riemer <s.rie...@littera.eu> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
>
> TL;DR: Is there an easy way, to copy
Hi folks,
TL;DR: Is there an easy way, to copy ISBNs with hyphens to the general text
field, respectively configure the analyser on that field, so that a search for
the hyphenated ISBN returns exactly the matching document?
Long version:
I've defined a field "text" of type "text_general",
Hi,
is there an easy way to preserve the query data I input in SolrAdmin?
E.g. when debugging a query, I often have the desire to reopen the current
query in solrAdmin in a new browser tab to make slight adaptions to the query
without losing the original query. What happens instead is the
suggestions,
Sebastian Riemer
ira/browse/SOLR-7495
On Jul 19, 2016 3:46 AM, "Sebastian Riemer" <s.rie...@littera.eu> wrote:
> May I respectfully refer again to a question I posted last week?
>
> Thank you very much and a nice day to you all!
>
> Sebastian
> ---
pleFacets.lambda$getFacetFieldCounts$50(SimpleFacets.java:733)\r\n\t...
37 more\r\n",
"code":500}}
Could anyone please explain if this is expected behaviour, point out what I am
doing wrong, or confirm that this is not expected behaviour?
Many thanks and best regards,
Sebastia
at I am
doing wrong, or confirm that this is not expected behaviour?
Many thanks and best regards,
Sebastian
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Sebastian Riemer [mailto:s.rie...@littera.eu]
Gesendet: Freitag, 8. Juli 2016 14:55
An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Betreff: group.facet=true and fac
Hi all,
are there any limitations in regard to retrieval of facet information, when
grouping?
When I send the following query where the field to facet ("m_pt_14_s_ns") on is
of type "string", everything works fine.
"q": "*:*",
"facet.field": "m_pt_14_s_ns",
"indent": "true",
"group.facet":
Hi,
Please consider the following three queries:
(1)this works:
{
"responseHeader": {
"status": 0,
"QTime": 5,
"params": {
"q": "(type_s:wemi AND {!parent which='type_s:wemi'v='-type_s:wemi AND
(((text:(Moby*'})",
"facet.field": "m_mainAuthority_s",
Hi,
I am looking for a way to serialize a SolrInputDocument.
I want to store the serialized document in a MySQL table.
Later I want to deserialize that document and send it to the Solr server.
Currently I am looking at org.apache.solr.client.solrj.request.UpdateRequest
and
open the cores
but the default is unlimited so you can run out of threads (really memory).
So the real answer is "it's not insane, but you really need to test it
operationally and tweak a bunch of settings before making your decision"
Best,
Erick
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 12:49 PM
Hi,
Currently I have a single solr server handling 5 cores which differ in the
content they provide.
However, each of them might hold data for many different clients/customers.
Let's say for example one day there might be 300 different clients each storing
their data in those 5 cores.
Every
hat big all time to the index schema but one never knows.
What's your opinion on this? May be there is another option as well?
Best regards,
Sebastian
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Sebastian Riemer, BSc
[logo_Littera_SC]<http://www.littera.eu/>
LITTERA Software & Consulting GmbH
A-6060 Hall i.
Sorry for the double post. Formatting got lost too :(
Whenever I mention the field "type" I actually mean "type_s".
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Sebastian Riemer [mailto:s.rie...@littera.eu]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Mai 2016 11:47
An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Hi all,
I have the suspicion that my index might contain orphaned child documents
because a query restricting to a field on a child document field returns two
parent documents where I only expect one document to match the query. As I
cannot figure out any obvious reason why the second
Hi all,
I have the suspicion that my index might contain orphaned child documents
because a query restricting to a field on a child document field returns two
parent documents where I only expect one document to match the query. As I
cannot figure out any obvious reason why the second
parentDocUpdateing.addChildDocument(childDoc);
solrClient.add(parentDocUpdateing);
solrClient.commit();
3) Results in 2 Documents with id="parent_1" in solr index
Is this normal behaviour? I thought the existing document should be updated
instead of generating a new documen
://stackoverflow.com/questions/34253178/solr-doesnt-overwrite-duplicated-uniquekey-entries
I would love if any of you could run the test at your place and give me
feedback.
If you have any questions do not hesitate to write me.
Many thanks in advance and best regards,
Sebastian Riemer
36 matches
Mail list logo
