How to create document objects in our case

Hi, I have a large number of XML files to be indexed by Lucene. All the files share similar structure as below: .. Things to be noted are: The root element of Group has 30 or so attributes, and it usually has over 2000 Subgroup elements, which in turn also have more than 20

Re: Please help me with a basic question...

: On trunk, you can add the "debug.explain.structured=true" param which will : cause the explanation messages to be returned as structured data. backported to 3x for inclusion in 3.2... https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1915 -Hoss

Re: Please help me with a basic question...

: I stumbled upon the 'Explain' function yesterday though it returns a crowded : message using debug in SOLR admin. Is there another method or interface : which returns more or cleaner info? On trunk, you can add the "debug.explain.structured=true" param which will cause the explanation messages

Re: Please help me with a basic question...

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Doron Cohen wrote: > I stumbled upon the 'Explain' function yesterday though it returns a crowded >> message using debug in SOLR admin. Is there another method or interface >> which returns more or cleaner info? >> > > I am not familiar with the use of Solr for thi

Re: Please help me with a basic question...

Hi Rich, SeetSpotSimilarity looks promising. Does it not favor shorter docs by not > normalizing or does it make some attempt to standardized. > > > - using e.g. SeetSpotSimilarity which do not favor shorter documents. > SweetSpotSimilarity (I misspelled it previously) defines a range of lengths

RE: Query Parser, Unary Operators and Multi-Field Query

Hi Renaud, On 5/20/2011 at 1:58 PM, Renaud Delbru wrote: > As said in > , > "if one or more of the terms in a term list has an explicit term operator > (+ or - or relational operator) the rest of the terms will be treated as

Re: How to delete docs when using NRT?

Phew :) Thanks for bringing closure Chris, Mike http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Chris Bamford wrote: > >  Mike - my bad.  I store my ids as numeric, and I was trying to delete using > a string termquery.  Got it working now. > > Thanks anyway > > - Chris > > >

Re: Query Parser, Unary Operators and Multi-Field Query

hi, not necessarily, I would have expected that the default AND operator applies whenever no other operators are precised in the query. As said in [1], "if one or more of the terms in a term list has an explicit term operator (+ or - or relational operator) the rest of the terms will be treat

Re: How to delete docs when using NRT?

Mike - my bad. I store my ids as numeric, and I was trying to delete using a string termquery. Got it working now. Thanks anyway - Chris -Original Message- From: Michael McCandless To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Fri, 20 May 2011 16:50 Subject: Re: How to delete do

Re: How to delete docs when using NRT?

That should have worked. There's nothing special about deleting docs when using NRT reader. Can you boil it down to a test case? Mike http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Chris Bamford wrote: > Hi there, > > Is there something special I should be doing here? This i

How to delete docs when using NRT?

Hi there, Is there something special I should be doing here? This is my sequence: open writer add doc #1 add doc #2 get reader from writer do a search on reader - matches doc #1 delete doc #1 from writer commit writer add doc #3 optimise writer close writer So by my reckoning, my index should

Re: Please help me with a basic question...

Bingo. That appears to be the essence of the problem, which makes sense given TF/IDF. I stumbled upon the 'Explain' function yesterday though it returns a crowded message using debug in SOLR admin. Is there another method or interface which returns more or cleaner info? I feel uncomfortable with

RE: Query Parser, Unary Operators and Multi-Field Query

Hi Renaud, That's normal behavior, since you have AND as default operator. This is equivalent to placing a "+" in front of every element of your query. In fact, if you removed the other two "+"s, you would get the same behavior. I think you'll get what you want by just switching the default

Query Parser, Unary Operators and Multi-Field Query

Hi, The behaviour of the query parser (either the standard lucene query parser, or the query parser contrib) is not what I expect when I am using - unary operators - a multi-field query - AND as default operator. For example, let say I have two field fieldA and fieldB, and the following query