Maybe you could add a length filter factory to filter out queries with 2 or
3 characters using
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/7_4/filter-descriptions.html#FilterDescriptions-LengthFilter
?

PS: this filter requires a max length too.

Edward

Em qui, 21 de fev de 2019 04:52, Furkan KAMACI <furkankam...@gmail.com>
escreveu:

> Hi Joakim,
>
> I suggest you to read these resources:
>
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Varnish-td4072057.html
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/SolrJ-HTTP-caching-td490063.html
> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrAndHTTPCaches
>
> which gives information about HTTP Caching including Varnish Cache,
> Last-Modified, ETag, Expires, Cache-Control headers.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Furkan KAMACI
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:18 PM Joakim Hansson <
> joakim.hansso...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello dear user list!
> > I work at a company in retail where we use solr to perform searches as
> you
> > type.
> > As soon as you type more than 1 characters in the search field solr
> starts
> > serving hits.
> > Of course this generates a lot of "unnecessary" queries (in the sense
> that
> > they are never shown to the user) which is why I started thinking about
> > using something like squid or varnish to cache a bunch of these 2-4
> > character queries.
> >
> > It seems most stuff I find about it is from pretty old sources, but as
> far
> > as I know solrcloud doesn't have distributed cache support.
> >
> > Our indexes aren't updated that frequently, about 4 - 6 times a day. We
> > don't use a lot of shards and replicas (biggest index is split to 3
> shards
> > with 2 replicas). All shards/replicas are not on the same solr host.
> > Our solr setup handles around 80-200 queries per second during the day
> with
> > peaks at >1500 before holiday season and sales.
> >
> > I haven't really read up on the details yet but it seems like I could use
> > etags and Expires headers to work around having to do some of that
> > "unnecessary" work.
> >
> > Is anyone doing this? Why? Why not?
> >
> > - peace!
> >
>

Reply via email to