Re: How to make search distributed and scalable

2011-04-20 Thread Kim Kokkonen
You might check out katta, which nicely combines lucene and hadoop: http://katta.sourceforge.net/ This page has some architectural talks: http://katta.sourceforge.net/about/talks -Kim On 4/19/2011 12:11 AM, Weiwei Wang wrote: Hi, buddies, I'm reading something about solr and elastic-s

Re: Locking Issue with Concurrency

2011-04-20 Thread Erick Erickson
What do you mean by "access"? Are you trying to write to the common index with more than one of your machines? Best Erick On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Yogesh Dabhi wrote: > > > Three Instance of My application & they access common lucene directory > > > > Instance1 jdk64 ,64 os > > Instance2

Locking Issue with Concurrency

2011-04-20 Thread Yogesh Dabhi
Three Instance of My application & they access common lucene directory Instance1 jdk64 ,64 os Instance2 jdk64 ,64 os Instance3 jdk32 ,32 os When I access folder from Instance1 I got bellow error An unexpected network error occurred I see the index folder there is one .lock file

Re: Solr 1.4.1: Weird query results

2011-04-20 Thread Erick Erickson
This is all very strange. I guess I only have a few suggestions: > It might be worth getting a copy of Luke. Under th "tools" menu there's a "checkindex" option that may show you something. You can also use Luke to query your index and examine it. That said, Luke uses Lucene, not Solr so

Re: Solr 1.4.1: Weird query results

2011-04-20 Thread Erik Fäßler
Oooops, I have to take something back: The index *has* been created with Lucene 2.9.3! Sorry for confusing that, I am using two different index versions, the older for productive purposes and the newer for what I am developing currently. I just checked back with Luke, he acknowledges that the

Re: Solr 1.4.1: Weird query results

2011-04-20 Thread Erik Fäßler
Thank you very much for your answers :-) First of all, I just noticed I sent the question unintentionally to the Lucene list while it's more of a Solr issue. I will answer here all the same to not confuse things. My apologies ;) First to Erick's suggestions. The default field has been "text"