lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dotan Cohen <>
Subject Re: After adding field to schema, the field is not being returned in results.
Date Sun, 04 Nov 2012 18:04:55 GMT
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Erick Erickson <> wrote:
> Well, I'm at my wits end. I tried your field definitions (using the
> exampledocs XML) and they work just fine. As far as if you mess up the date
> on the way in, you should be seeing stack traces in your log files.

Please don't go to wit's end on this! I'm a bit frustrated too, but I
really don't want to bring the frustration to the mailing list!

> The only way I see not getting the "Sorry, no Term Info available :("
> message is if you don't have any values in the field. So, my guess is that
> you're not getting the format right and the docs aren't getting indexed,
> but that's just a guess. You can freely sort even if there are no values at
> all in a particular field. This can be indicated if you sort asc and desc
> and the order doesn't change. It just means the field is defined in the
> schema, not necessarily that there are any values in it.
> So, I claim you have no date values in your index. The fact that you can
> sort is just an artifact of sortMissingFirst/Last doing something sensible.
> Next question, are you absolutely sure that your indexing program and your
> searching program are pointing at the same server?
> So what I'd do next is
> 1> create a simple XML doc that conforms to your schema and use the
> post.jar tool to send it to your server. Watch the output log for any date
> format exceptions.
> 2> Use the admin UI to insure that you can see terms in docs added this way.
> 3> from there back up and see what step in the indexing process isn't
> working (assuming that's the problem). Solr logs help here.
> Note I'm completely PHP-ignorant, I have no clue whether the formatting
> you're doing is OK or not. You might try logging the value somewhere in
> your php so you an post that and/or include it in your sample XML file...

Yes, it seems that there is a contradiction. On one hand, by appending
the value of the created_iso8601 field to another field, I can ensure
that the value is legal and does exist! On the other hand, it seems
that there is no such value being stored in the index, but new
documents are being added that ostensibly should have that value.

I'll try adding a document with post.jar and see what happens. I'll
update the thread.


Dotan Cohen

View raw message