Hi Alexandre, Yes, the indexing works fine previously until the following line is added to my /update handler in solrconfig.xml.
<requestHandler name="/update" class="solr.UpdateRequestHandler"> <lst name="defaults"> <str name="update.chain">dedupe</str> </lst> </requestHandler> Regards, Edwin On 1 September 2015 at 20:25, Alexandre Rafalovitch <arafa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Do you mean that normally you do get stuff indexed but when you make > any of these changes the indexing stops working and you get empty > index? If so, you probably misconfigured something and should be > getting error messages. > > If, on the other hand, you see no changes, check that you are actually > using that URP chain. It needs to be declared in the search handler to > be used. Or it can be passed as a URL parameter too. The documentation > has the details. > > Regards, > Alex. > ---- > Solr Analyzers, Tokenizers, Filters, URPs and even a newsletter: > http://www.solr-start.com/ > > > On 1 September 2015 at 04:46, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo <edwinye...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Hi Upayavira, > > > > I've tried to change <str name="signatureField">id</str> to be <str > > name="signatureField">signature</str>, but nothing is indexed into Solr > as > > well. Is that what you mean? > > > > Besides that, I've also included a copyField to copy the content field > into > > the signature field. Both versions (with and without copyField) have > > nothing indexed into Solr. > > > > Regards, > > Edwin > > > > > > On 1 September 2015 at 15:48, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: > > > >> you are attempting to write your signature to your ID field. That's not > >> a good idea. You are generating your signature from the content field, > >> which seems okay. Change your <str name="signatureField">id</str> to be > >> your 'signature' field instead of id, and something different will > >> happen :-) > >> > >> Upayavira > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015, at 04:34 AM, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo wrote: > >> > I tried to follow the de-duplication guide, but after I configured it > in > >> > solrconfig.xml and schema.xml, nothing is indexed into Solr, and > there is > >> > no error message. I'm using SimplePostTool to index rich-text > documents. > >> > > >> > Below are my configurations: > >> > > >> > In solrconfig.xml > >> > > >> > <requestHandler name="/update" class="solr.UpdateRequestHandler"> > >> > <lst name="defaults"> > >> > <str name="update.chain">dedupe</str> > >> > </lst> > >> > </requestHandler> > >> > > >> > <updateRequestProcessorChain name="dedupe"> > >> > <processor class="solr.processor.SignatureUpdateProcessorFactory"> > >> > <bool name="enabled">true</bool> > >> > <str name="signatureField">id</str> > >> > <bool name="overwriteDupes">false</bool> > >> > <str name="fields">content</str> > >> > <str name="signatureClass">solr.processor.Lookup3Signature</str> > >> > </processor> > >> > </updateRequestProcessorChain> > >> > > >> > > >> > In schema.xml > >> > > >> > <field name="signature" type="string" stored="true" indexed="true" > >> > multiValued="false" /> > >> > > >> > > >> > Is there anything which I might have missed out or done wrongly? > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > Edwin > >> > > >> > > >> > On 1 September 2015 at 10:46, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo < > edwinye...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Thank you for your advice Alexandre. > >> > > > >> > > Will try out the de-duplication from the link you gave. > >> > > > >> > > Regards, > >> > > Edwin > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On 1 September 2015 at 10:34, Alexandre Rafalovitch < > >> arafa...@gmail.com> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> Re-read the question. You want to de-dupe on the full text-content. > >> > >> > >> > >> I would actually try to use the dedupe chain as per the link I gave > >> > >> but put results into a separate string field. Then, you group on > that > >> > >> field. You cannot actually group on the long text field, that would > >> > >> kill any performance. So a signature is your proxy. > >> > >> > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Alex > >> > >> ---- > >> > >> Solr Analyzers, Tokenizers, Filters, URPs and even a newsletter: > >> > >> http://www.solr-start.com/ > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 31 August 2015 at 22:26, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo < > edwinye...@gmail.com > >> > > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi Alexandre, > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Will treating it as String affect the search or other functions > like > >> > >> > highlighting? > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Yes, the content must be in my index, unless I do a copyField to > do > >> > >> > de-duplication on that field.. Will that help? > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Regards, > >> > >> > Edwin > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > On 1 September 2015 at 10:04, Alexandre Rafalovitch < > >> arafa...@gmail.com > >> > >> > > >> > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > >> >> Can't you just treat it as String? > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> Also, do you actually want those documents in your index in the > >> first > >> > >> >> place? If not, have you looked at De-duplication: > >> > >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/De-Duplication > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> Regards, > >> > >> >> Alex. > >> > >> >> ---- > >> > >> >> Solr Analyzers, Tokenizers, Filters, URPs and even a newsletter: > >> > >> >> http://www.solr-start.com/ > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> On 31 August 2015 at 22:00, Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo < > >> edwinye...@gmail.com> > >> > >> >> wrote: > >> > >> >> > Thanks Jan. > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > But I read that the field that is being collapsed on must be a > >> single > >> > >> >> > valued String, Int or Float. As I'm required to get the > distinct > >> > >> results > >> > >> >> > from "content" field that was indexed from a rich text > document, > >> I > >> > >> got > >> > >> >> the > >> > >> >> > following error: > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > "error":{ > >> > >> >> > "msg":"java.io.IOException: 64 bit numeric collapse fields > >> are > >> > >> not > >> > >> >> > supported", > >> > >> >> > "trace":"java.lang.RuntimeException: java.io.IOException: > 64 > >> bit > >> > >> >> > numeric collapse fields are not supported\r\n\tat > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > Is it possible to collapsed on fields which has a long > integer of > >> > >> data, > >> > >> >> > like content from a rich text document? > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > Regards, > >> > >> >> > Edwin > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > On 31 August 2015 at 18:59, Jan Høydahl < > jan....@cominvent.com> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> Hi > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> Check out the CollapsingQParser ( > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Collapse+and+Expand+Results > >> > >> >> ). > >> > >> >> >> As long as you have a field that will be the same for all > >> > >> duplicates, > >> > >> >> you > >> > >> >> >> can “collapse” on that field. If you not have a “group id”, > you > >> can > >> > >> >> create > >> > >> >> >> one using e.g. an MD5 signature of the identical body text ( > >> > >> >> >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/De-Duplication > >> ). > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> -- > >> > >> >> >> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect > >> > >> >> >> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > 31. aug. 2015 kl. 12.03 skrev Zheng Lin Edwin Yeo < > >> > >> >> edwinye...@gmail.com > >> > >> >> >> >: > >> > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > Hi, > >> > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > I'm using Solr 5.2.1, and I would like to find out, what is > >> the > >> > >> best > >> > >> >> way > >> > >> >> >> to > >> > >> >> >> > get Solr to return only distinct results? > >> > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > Currently, I've indexed several exact similar documents > into > >> Solr, > >> > >> >> with > >> > >> >> >> > just different id and title, but the content is exactly the > >> same. > >> > >> >> When I > >> > >> >> >> do > >> > >> >> >> > a search, Solr will return all these documents several time > >> in the > >> > >> >> list. > >> > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > What is the most suitable way to get Solr to return only > one > >> of > >> > >> the > >> > >> >> >> > document during the search? > >> > >> >> >> > I understand that there is result grouping and faceting, > but > >> I'm > >> > >> not > >> > >> >> sure > >> > >> >> >> > if that is the best way. > >> > >> >> >> > > >> > >> >> >> > Regards, > >> > >> >> >> > Edwin > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > > >> >
