lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ्" <noble.p...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: How to handle large field values.
Date Wed, 05 Nov 2008 11:40:48 GMT
the fl must have the unique id field also.
because if fl is mentioned it returns only the mentioned one

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Luca Molteni <volothamp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Uhm, this works great when using only one server, because I can
> specify the fields in the configuration file, but It gives me a nice
> nullpointer exception when using distributed shards:
>
> HTTP Status 500 - null java.lang.NullPointerException at
> org.apache.solr.handler.component.QueryComponent.returnFields(QueryComponent.java:511)
> at org.apache.solr.handler.component.QueryComponent.handleResponses(QueryComponent.java:270)
> at
>
>
>      for (SolrDocument doc : docs) {
>        Object id = doc.getFieldValue(keyFieldName);
>        ShardDoc sdoc = rb.resultIds.get(id.toString());
>        if (returnScores && sdoc.score != null) {
>          doc.setField("score", sdoc.score);
>        }
>        rb._responseDocs.set(sdoc.positionInResponse, doc);
>      }
>
> Any idea?
>
> L.M.
>
>
> 2008/11/5 Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ् <noble.paul@gmail.com>
>>
>> the 'fl' parameter can be added to the defaults for your search
>> handler in solrconfig.xml
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Luca Molteni <volothamp@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hello everybody,
>> >
>> > dealing with very large fields, let's say text documents, I found that there
>> > is a global slowness (on my computer)  in returning those field. Since most
>> > of the time what we want is an "highlight" value of the field and not the
>> > entire field, I thought that we can omit these field from the query. I've
>> > tried two methods:
>> >
>> > - Stored = false works very well, the query is faster, but the highlightning
>> > doesn't work anymore (sigh, I know it's by design).
>> > - Stored = true and filtering with the "fl" parameters requires me to enter
>> > all the fields by hand, since the fl query doesn't support a minus operator
>> > (let's say, all the field withouth my
>> > veryLargeFieldIDontWantToRetrieveButIWantToSeeAVerySmallPortion).
>> >
>> > Strangely, using the "fl" parameter in federeated search with "shards" and
>> > two different server with different schemas, gave me strange results (no
>> > results, actually). It all works well using only one shard, but it was very
>> > difficult to benchmark it.
>> >
>> > Any advice? I hope I'm missing something.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > L.M.
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --Noble Paul
>



-- 
--Noble Paul
Mime
View raw message