Dimitry, I have used lukeall-3.5.0.jar and when trying to open the index it gives me the error "No Valid Directory at the location, try another location"
When using the below command I see this error "luke java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 1" java -cp C:\lukeall-3.5.0.jar org.getopt.luke.Luke -index C:\solr\home\data\docs_index\index\ We are using Solr 4.0 -Shyam -----Original Message----- From: Shyam Bhaskaran [mailto:shyam.bhaska...@synopsys.com] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 11:49 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: Question on Reverse Indexing Dimitry, I downloaded Luke but it was not working for me against solr indexes. But using the solr analysis page I did not find any reversed sequences on the field. -Shyam -----Original Message----- From: Shyam Bhaskaran [mailto:shyam.bhaska...@synopsys.com] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2012 6:29 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: Question on Reverse Indexing Dimitry, Completed a clean index and I still see the same behavior. Did not use Luke but from the search page we use leading wild card search is working. -Shyam -----Original Message----- From: Dmitry Kan [mailto:dmitry....@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 5:07 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Question on Reverse Indexing Shyam, You still didn't say if you have started re-indexing from the clean index, i.e. if you have removed all the data prior to re-indexing. You can use the luke (http://code.google.com/p/luke/) to check the contents of your text field, and see if it still contains reversed sequences. On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Shyam Bhaskaran < shyam.bhaska...@synopsys.com> wrote: > Dimitry, > > We are using Solr 4.0. To confirm server caching issues I have restarted > our tomcat webserver after performing a re-index. > > For reverseIndexing we have defined a fieldType "text_rev" and this > fieldyType was used against the fields. > > <fieldType name="text_rev" class="solr.TextField" sortMissingLast="true" > omitNorms="true"> > <analyzer type="index"> > <tokenizer > class="com.es.solr.backend.analysis.standard.SolvNetTokenizerFactory"/> > <filter class="solr.StopFilterFactory" > words="stopwords.txt" ignoreCase="true"/> > <filter > class="com.es.solr.backend.analysis.standard.SolvNetFilterFactory"/> > <filter class="solr.SynonymFilterFactory" > synonyms="synonyms.txt" ignoreCase="true" expand="true"/> > <filter > class="com.es.solr.backend.analysis.standard.SpecialCharSynonymFilterFactory"/> > <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"/> > <filter class="solr.ReversedWildcardFilterFactory" > withOriginal="true" > maxPosAsterisk="3" maxPosQuestion="2" > maxFractionAsterisk="0.33"/> > </analyzer> > <analyzer type="query"> > <tokenizer > class="com.es.solr.backend.analysis.standard.SolvNetTokenizerFactory"/> > <filter class="solr.StopFilterFactory" > words="stopwords.txt" ignoreCase="true"/> > <filter > class="com.es.solr.backend.analysis.standard.SolvNetFilterFactory"/> > <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"/> > <filter class="solr.StopFilterFactory" > words="stopwords.txt" ignoreCase="true"/> > </analyzer> > </fieldType> > > But when it was found that ReversedWildcardFilterFactory is adding > performance burden we removed the ReversedWildcardFilterFactory filter > <filter class="solr.ReversedWildcardFilterFactory" > withOriginal="true" > maxPosAsterisk="3" maxPosQuestion="2" > maxFractionAsterisk="0.33"/> > and the whole collection was re-indexed. > > But even after removing the ReversedWildcardFilterFactory leading wild > card search like *lock is working. > > -Shyam > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dmitry Kan [mailto:dmitry....@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 4:26 PM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Question on Reverse Indexing > > OK. Not sure what is your system architecture there, but could your queries > stay cached in some server caches even after you have re-indexed your data? > The way the index level leading wildcard works (reading SOLR 3.4 code, but > seems to be true circa 1.4) is that the following check is done for the > analysis chain: > > [code src=SolrQueryParser.java] > boolean allow = false; > ... > if (factory instanceof ReversedWildcardFilterFactory) { > allow = true; > ... > } > ... > if (allow) { > setAllowLeadingWildcard(true); > } > [/code] > > so practically what you described can happen if > the ReversedWildcardFilterFactory is still mentioned in one of your shards. > A weird question, but have you reindexed your data to a clean index or on > top of the existing one? > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Shyam Bhaskaran < > shyam.bhaska...@synopsys.com> wrote: > > > Dimitry, > > > > Using http://localhost:7070/solr/docs/admin/analysis.jsp passed the > query > > *lock and did not find ReversedWildcardFilterFactory to the indexer or > any > > other filters that could do the reversing. > > > > -Shyam > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dmitry Kan [mailto:dmitry....@gmail.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 2:26 PM > > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Question on Reverse Indexing > > > > Just to play safe here, can you double check that the reversing is not > any > > more the case by issuing a query through the admin analysis page? > > > > Dmitry > > > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Shyam Bhaskaran < > > shyam.bhaska...@synopsys.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi Francois, > > > > > > I understand that disabling of ReversedWildcardFilterFactory has > improved > > > the performance. > > > > > > But I am puzzled over how the leading wild card search like *lock is > > > working even though I have now disabled the > ReversedWildcardFilterFactory > > > and the indexes have been created without ReversedWildcardFilter ? > > > > > > How does reverse indexing work even after disabling > > > ReversedWildcardFilterFactory? > > > > > > Can anyone explain me how this feature is working. > > > > > > -Shyam > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: François Schiettecatte [mailto:fschietteca...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 7:49 AM > > > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Question on Reverse Indexing > > > > > > Using ReversedWildcardFilterFactory will double the size of your > > > dictionary (more or less), maybe the drop in performance that you are > > > seeing is a result of that? > > > > > > François > > > > > > On Jan 17, 2012, at 9:01 PM, Shyam Bhaskaran wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > For reverse indexing we are using the ReversedWildcardFilterFactory > on > > > Solr 4.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > <filter class="solr.ReversedWildcardFilterFactory" > withOriginal="true" > > > > > > > > maxPosAsterisk="3" maxPosQuestion="2" maxFractionAsterisk="0.33"/> > > > > > > > > > > > > ReversedWildcardFilterFactory was helping us to perform leading wild > > > card searches like *lock. > > > > > > > > But it was observed that the performance of the searches was not good > > > after introducing ReversedWildcardFilterFactory filter. > > > > > > > > Hence we disabled ReversedWildcardFilterFactory filter and re-created > > > the indexes and this time we found the performance of Solr query to be > > > faster. > > > > > > > > But surprisingly it is observed that leading wild card searches were > > > still working inspite of disabling the ReversedWildcardFilterFactory > > filter. > > > > > > > > > > > > This behavior is puzzling everyone and wanted to know how this > behavior > > > of reverse indexing works? > > > > > > > > Can anyone share with me on this Solr behavior. > > > > > > > > -Shyam > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > > > Dmitry Kan > > > > > > -- > Regards, > > Dmitry Kan > -- Regards, Dmitry Kan
