"We need to also track the size of the response (as the size in bytes of the
whole xml response tat is streamed, with stored fields and all). I was a
bit worried cause I am wondering if a searchcomponent will actually have
access to the response bytes..."

==> Can't you get this from your container access logs after the fact? I
may be misunderstanding something but why wouldn't mining the Jetty/Tomcat
logs for the response size here suffice?

Thanks!
Amit


On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:34 AM, xavier jmlucjav <jmluc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> A custom QueryResponseWriter...this makes sense, thanks Jack
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Jack Krupansky <j...@basetechnology.com
> >wrote:
>
> > The search components can see the "response" as a namedlist, but it is
> > only when SolrDispatchFIlter calls the QueryResponseWriter that XML or
> JSON
> > or whatever other format (Javabin as well) is generated from the named
> list
> > for final output in an HTTP response.
> >
> > You probably want a custom query response writer that wraps the XML
> > response writer. Then you can generate the XML and then do whatever you
> > want with it.
> >
> > The QueryResponseWriter class and <queryResponseWriter> in
> solrconfig.xml.
> >
> > -- Jack Krupansky
> >
> > -----Original Message----- From: xavier jmlucjav
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 4:22 PM
> > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> > Subject: do SearchComponents have access to response contents
> >
> >
> > I need to implement some SearchComponent that will deal with metrics on
> the
> > response. Some things I see will be easy to get, like number of hits for
> > instance, but I am more worried with this:
> >
> > We need to also track the size of the response (as the size in bytes of
> the
> > whole xml response tat is streamed, with stored fields and all). I was a
> > bit worried cause I am wondering if a searchcomponent will actually have
> > access to the response bytes...
> >
> > Can someone confirm one way or the other? We are targeting Sorl4.0
> >
> > thanks
> > xavier
> >
>

Reply via email to