lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ravi Solr <>
Subject Re: Weird query issues
Date Sun, 21 Apr 2013 02:33:40 GMT
Thanks for your advise Shawn. I have created a JIRA issue SOLR-4743.

On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Shawn Heisey <> wrote:

> On 4/20/2013 9:08 AM, Ravi Solr wrote:
> > Thanks you very much for responding Shawn. I never use IE, I use firefox.
> > These are brand new servers and I don't think I am mixing versions. What
> > made you think I was using the 1.4.1 ?? You are correct in saying that
> the
> > server is throwing HTML response since a group query has been failing
> with
> > SEVERE error following which the entire instance behaves weirdly until we
> > restart.
> >
> > Its surprising that group query error handling has such glaring issue. If
> > you specify group=true but don't specify group.query or group.field SOLR
> > throws a SEVERE exception following which we see the empty queries and
> > finally no responses via solrj and admin console gives numFound always
> > equal to total number of docs in index . Looks like the searcher goes
> for a
> > spin once it encounters the exception. Such situation should have been
> > gracefully handled
> Ah, so what's happening is that after an invalid grouping query, Solr is
> unstable and stops working right.  You should file an issue in Jira,
> giving as much detail as you can.  My last message was almost completely
> wrong.
> You are right that it should be gracefully handled, and obviously it is
> not.  For the 3.x Solr versions, grouping did not exist before 3.6.  It
> is a major 4.x feature that was backported.  Sometimes such major
> features depend on significant changes that have not happened on older
> versions, leading to problems like this.  Unfortunately, you could wait
> quite a while for a fix on 3.6, where active development has stopped.
> I have no personal experience with grouping, but I just tried the
> problematic query (adding "&group=true" to one that works) on 4.2.1.  It
> doesn't throw an error, I just get no results. When I follow it with a
> regular query, everything works perfectly. Would you be able to upgrade
> to 4.2.1?  That's not a trivial thing to do, so hopefully you are
> already working on upgrading.
> Thanks,
> Shawn

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message