lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robust Links <pey...@robustlinks.com>
Subject Re: retrieving large number of docs
Date Thu, 04 Jun 2015 14:00:26 GMT
my requirement is to join core1 onto core0. restating the requirements
again. I have 2 cores

core0
--------
field:id
field: text

core1
--------
field:id
field tag


I want to

1) query text field of core0, together with filters
2) use the {id} of matches (which can be >>10K) to retrieve the docs in
core 1 with same id and
3) facet on tags in core1

so my /select is to run on core0 and facet on tag field of core1

thank you Alessandro


On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 9:28 AM, Alessandro Benedetti <
benedetti.alex85@gmail.com> wrote:

> Lets try to make clear some point :
>
> Index TO : is the one you are using to call the select request handler
> Index From : Tags
> Is titleNormalized present in the "Tags" index ? Because there is where the
> query will run.
>
> The documents in tags satisfying the query will be joined with the index TO
> .
> The resulting documents can be filtered and faceted.
> I did use this approach a lot of times.
> And I can tell you it is working in this way.
> Maybe you misunderstood the Join feature, or I misunderstood your
> requirement.
>
> Cheers
>
> 2015-06-04 13:27 GMT+01:00 Robust Links <peyman@robustlinks.com>:
>
> > try it for yourself and see if it works Alessandro. Not only cant i get
> > facets but i even get field errors when i run such join queries
> >
> > select?fl=title&q={!join from=id to=id fromIndex=Tags}titleNormalized:pdf
> >
> > <lst name="error">
> > <str name="msg">undefined field titleNormalized</str>
> > <int name="code">400</int>
> > </lst>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:19 AM, Alessandro Benedetti <
> > benedetti.alex85@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Rob,
> > > Reading your use case I can not understand why the Query Time join is
> > not a
> > > fit for you !
> > > The documents returned by the Query Time Join will be from core1, so
> > > faceting and filter querying that core, would definitely be possible !
> > > I can not see your problem honestly !
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > > 2015-06-04 1:47 GMT+01:00 Robust Links <peyman@robustlinks.com>:
> > >
> > > > that doesnt work either, and even if it did, joining is not going to
> > be a
> > > > solution since i cant query 1 core and facet on the result of the
> > other.
> > > To
> > > > sum up, my problem is
> > > >
> > > > core0
> > > > --------
> > > > field:id
> > > > field: text
> > > >
> > > > core1
> > > > --------
> > > > field:id
> > > > field tag
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I want to
> > > >
> > > > 1) query text field of core0,
> > > > 2) use the {id} of matches (which can be >>10K) to retrieve the
docs
> in
> > > > core 1 with same id and
> > > > 3) facet on tags in core1
> > > >
> > > > Is this possible without denormalizing (which is not an option)?
> > > >
> > > > thank you
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Jack Krupansky <
> > jack.krupansky@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Specify the join query parser for the main query. See:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Other+Parsers#OtherParsers-JoinQueryParser
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Jack Krupansky
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Robust Links <
> peyman@robustlinks.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Erick
> > > > > >
> > > > > > they are on the same JVM. I had already tried the core join
> > strategy
> > > > but
> > > > > > that doesnt solve the faceting problem... i.e if i have 2 cores,
> > > core0
> > > > > and
> > > > > > core1, and I run this query on core0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > /select?&q=<QUERY>fq={!join from=id1 to=id2
> > > > > > fromIndex=core1}&facet=true&facet.field=tag
> > > > > >
> > > > > > has 2 problems
> > > > > > 1) i need to specify the docIDs with the fq (so back to the
same
> > > > > > fq={!terms} problem), and
> > > > > > 2) faceting doesnt work
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Flattening the data is not possible due to security reasons.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am I using join correctly?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thank you Erick
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Peyman
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Erick Erickson <
> > > > erickerickson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Are these indexes on different machines? Because if they're
in
> > the
> > > > > > > same JVM, you might be able to use cross-core joins. Be
aware,
> > > > though,
> > > > > > > that joining on high-cardinality fields (which, by definition,
> > > docID
> > > > > > > probably is) is where pseudo joins perform worst.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have you considered flattening the data and including whatever
> > > > > > > information you have in your "from" index in your main
index?
> > > Because
> > > > > > > < 100ms response is probably not going to be tough if
you have
> to
> > > > have
> > > > > > > two indexes/cores.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > Erick
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Joel Bernstein <
> > > joelsolr@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > You may have to do something custom to meet your needs.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 10,000 DocID's is not huge but you're latency requirement
are
> > > > pretty
> > > > > > low.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Are your DocID's by any chance integers? This can
make custom
> > > > > > PostFilters
> > > > > > > > run much faster.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You should also be aware of the Streaming API in Solr
5.1
> which
> > > > will
> > > > > > give
> > > > > > > > you fast Map/Reduce approaches (
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-streaming-api-solrjio-basics.html
> > > > > > > ).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Joel Bernstein
> > > > > > > > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Robust Links <
> > > > peyman@robustlinks.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Hey Joel
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> see below
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Joel Bernstein
<
> > > > joelsolr@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > A few questions for you:
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > How large can the list of filtering ID's
be?
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> >> 10k
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > What's your expectation on latency?
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> 10> latency <100
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > What version of Solr are you using?
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> 5.0.0
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > SolrCloud or not?
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> not
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Joel Bernstein
> > > > > > > >> > http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Robust Links
<
> > > > > > peyman@robustlinks.com>
> > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > > Hi
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > I have a set of document IDs from one
core and i want to
> > > query
> > > > > > > another
> > > > > > > >> > core
> > > > > > > >> > > using the ids retrieved from the first
core...the
> > constraint
> > > > is
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > >> > > size of doc ID set can be very large.
I want to:
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > 1) retrieve these docs from the 2nd
index
> > > > > > > >> > > 2) facet on the results
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > I can think of 3 solutions:
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > 1) boolean query
> > > > > > > >> > > 2) terms fq
> > > > > > > >> > > 3) use a DB rather than Solr
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > I am trying to keep latencies down so
prefer to not use
> > (3).
> > > > The
> > > > > > > >> problem
> > > > > > > >> > > with (1) is maxBooleanclauses is hardwired
and I am not
> > sure
> > > > > when
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > > >> will
> > > > > > > >> > > hit the exception. Option (2) seems
to also hit limits..
> > so
> > > > if I
> > > > > > do
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >
> select?fl=*&q=*:*&facet=true&facet.field=title&fq={!terms
> > > > > > > >> > > f=id}<LONG_LIST_OF_IDS>
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > solr just goes blank. I have tried adding
cost=200 to
> try
> > to
> > > > run
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > query
> > > > > > > >> > > first fq={!terms f=id cost=200} but
still no good.
> Paging
> > on
> > > > doc
> > > > > > IDs
> > > > > > > >> > could
> > > > > > > >> > > be a solution but the problem then is
that the faceting
> > > > results
> > > > > > > >> > correspond
> > > > > > > >> > > to the paged IDs and not the global
set.
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > My filter cache spec is as follows
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >   <filterCache class="solr.FastLRUCache"
> > > > > > > >> > >                  size="1000000"
> > > > > > > >> > >                  initialSize="1000000"
> > > > > > > >> > >                  autowarmCount="100000"/>
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > What would be the best way for me to
solve this problem?
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> > > thank you
> > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > --------------------------
> > >
> > > Benedetti Alessandro
> > > Visiting card : http://about.me/alessandro_benedetti
> > >
> > > "Tyger, tyger burning bright
> > > In the forests of the night,
> > > What immortal hand or eye
> > > Could frame thy fearful symmetry?"
> > >
> > > William Blake - Songs of Experience -1794 England
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> --------------------------
>
> Benedetti Alessandro
> Visiting card : http://about.me/alessandro_benedetti
>
> "Tyger, tyger burning bright
> In the forests of the night,
> What immortal hand or eye
> Could frame thy fearful symmetry?"
>
> William Blake - Songs of Experience -1794 England
>

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