DocValue not replicated

Hi, I have SOLR 4.9 with master/slave architecture. And I use DocValue for custom ranking. After I update doc on master, it looks like the DocValue not get replicated to slave. After I wait for next poll from slave, it¹s OK. Is there a delay of replicate or loading of DocValues? Thanks a lot!

Lucene/Solr Revolution 2015 - Austin Oct 13-16 - CFP ends next Week

(cross posted, please confine any replies to general@lucene) A quick reminder and/or heads up for htose who haven't heard yet: this year's Lucene/Solr Revolution is happeing in Austin Texas in October. The CFP and Early bird registration are currently open. (CFP ends May 8, Early Bird ends

RE: Lucene indexing speed on NVMe drive

Hi Chris, Thanks for your comment. You are correct, it looks to be CPU bound. However I am monitoring CPU utilization on all cores (40) and don't see close to 100% utilization on 20 cores, but all cores show activity ranging from %20 to 80% with lots of ups and downs. Can you help me understand

highlighter/fragmenter question

Hello, I'm not sure if this is the correct approach, so please let me know if there is a better way to accomplish the following task I am attempting to search an entire database for a keyword. To do this, I indexed all the data fields into a single "content" field with a delimiter between each

Re: Lucene indexing speed on NVMe drive

: Hi. I am studying Lucene performance and in particular how it benefits from faster I/O such as SSD and NVMe. : parameters as used in nightlyBench. (Hardware: Intel Xeon, 2.5GHz, 20 : processor ,40 with hyperthreading, 64G Memory) and study indexing speed ... : I get best performance

Lucene indexing speed on NVMe drive

Hi. I am studying Lucene performance and in particular how it benefits from faster I/O such as SSD and NVMe. I am using nightlybench for indexing wiki (1K docs) with similar parameters as used in nightlyBench. (Hardware: Intel Xeon, 2.5GHz, 20 processor ,40 with hyperthreading, 64G Memory) and s

RE: getting exception in lucene 4.0

Hi, This generally happens if you don't deploy the original Lucene JAR files and instead create so-called super-jars (one large JAR file with all classes merged together). Unfortunately this approach misses to copy/merge relevant metadata in the META-INF folder of the original JARs. Without the

getting exception in lucene 4.0

i am getting below exception while using apache lucene in web service with tomcat ,axis 2 .This exception is not coming in standalone application. Java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: A SPI class of type org.apache.lucene.codecs.Codec with name 'Lucene42' does not exist. You need to add the corresp

Re: custom collector

Hi West thank you for the help. I will try your suggestion. thank you again Peyman On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 10:01 PM, west suhanic wrote: > Hi Robust Links: > > I think you want to build a class that implements the LeafCollector. > For example: > > public class theLeafCollectorDocid implements

Re: Lucene Field Boost

I am using Lucene version 3.0.0. I am already setting boost to field but still result are not according to requirement i.e. Document that have all the matching term either in title or body field must be on top. Regardless of term frequency & idf. 1. I have 2 fields in document i.e. Title & bod

RE: Lucene Field Boost

Depending on your version of Lucene, perhaps: http://lucene.apache.org/core/4_10_4/core/org/apache/lucene/document/Field.html#setBoost(float) -Original Message- From: Muhammad Ismail [mailto:it.is.ism...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 3:22 AM To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Sub

Re: Lucene Field Boost

Any one ? On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 12:01 AM, Muhammad Ismail wrote: > Hi > > I have simple index with 2 fields i.e. title and body. When i perform a > simple search query like bring document which have particular text like > lazy or dog or brown in either title or body but I want matches in title

Re: SortingAtomicReader alternate to Tim-Sort...

> > Would you like to submit a patch that changes SortingMergePolicy to > use the approach that you are proposing using bitsets instead of > sorting int[] arrays? Sure can do that. Can you open a ticket for this, as I don't know what versions this can go in? -- Ravi On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 6: