lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aman Deep Singh <amandeep.coo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Facet is not working while querying with group
Date Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:11:15 GMT
1. No it is with schema with some dynamic fields but facet fields are
proper field
2. No copy field is stored field all are set as stored=false



On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 10:21 PM Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com>
wrote:

> OK, new collection.
>
> 1> With schemaless? When you add a document in schemaless mode, it
> makes some guesses that may not play nice later.
>
> 2> Are you storing the _destination_ of any copyField? Atomic updates
> do odd things if you set stored="true" for fields that are
> destinations for atomic updates, specifically accumulate values in
> them. You should set stored="false" for all destinations of copyField
> directives.
>
> Best,
> Erick
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Aman Deep Singh
> <amandeep.cool99@gmail.com> wrote:
> > No Shawn,
> > I download the latest solr again then run without installing by command
> > ./bin/solr -c
> > after upload the fresh configset and create the new collection
> > Then create a single document in solr
> > after do atomic update
> > and the same error occurs again.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 7:53 PM Shawn Heisey <apache@elyograg.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 6/20/2017 11:01 PM, Aman Deep Singh wrote:
> >> > If I am using docValues=false getting this exception
> >> > java.lang.IllegalStateException: Type mismatch: isBlibliShipping was
> >> > indexed with multiple values per document, use SORTED_SET instead at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.solr.uninverting.FieldCacheImpl$SortedDocValuesCache.createValue(FieldCacheImpl.java:799)
> >> > at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.solr.uninverting.FieldCacheImpl$Cache.get(FieldCacheImpl.java:187)
> >> > at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.solr.uninverting.FieldCacheImpl.getTermsIndex(FieldCacheImpl.java:767)
> >> > at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.solr.uninverting.FieldCacheImpl.getTermsIndex(FieldCacheImpl.java:747)
> >> > at
> >> > But if docValues=true then getting this error
> >> > java.lang.IllegalStateException: unexpected docvalues type NUMERIC for
> >> > field 'isBlibliShipping' (expected=SORTED). Re-index with correct
> >> docvalues
> >> > type. at
> org.apache.lucene.index.DocValues.checkField(DocValues.java:212)
> >> > at org.apache.lucene.index.DocValues.getSorted(DocValues.java:264) at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.search.grouping.term.TermGroupFacetCollector$SV.doSetNextReader(TermGroupFacetCollector.java:129)
> >> > at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.search.SimpleCollector.getLeafCollector(SimpleCollector.java:33)
> >> > at
> org.apache.lucene.search.IndexSearcher.search(IndexSearcher.java:659)
> >> at
> >> > org.apache.lucene.search.IndexSearcher.search(IndexSearcher.java:472)
> at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.solr.request.SimpleFacets.getGroupedCounts(SimpleFacets.java:692)
> >> > at
> >> >
> org.apache.solr.request.SimpleFacets.getTermCounts(SimpleFacets.java:476)
> >> > at
> >> >
> org.apache.solr.request.SimpleFacets.getTermCounts(SimpleFacets.java:405)
> >> > at
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.solr.request.SimpleFacets.lambda$getFacetFieldCounts$0(SimpleFacets.java:803)
> >> >
> >> > It Only appear in case when we facet on group query normal facet works
> >> fine
> >> >
> >> > Also appears only when we atomically update the document.
> >>
> >> These errors look like problems that appear when you *change* the
> >> schema, but try to use that new schema with an existing Lucene index
> >> directory.  As Erick already mentioned, certain changes in the schema
> >> *require* completely deleting the index directory and
> >> restarting/reloading, or starting with a brand new index.  Deleting all
> >> documents instead of wiping out the index may leave Lucene remnants with
> >> incorrect metadata for the new schema.
> >>
> >> What you've said elsewhere in the thread is that you're starting with a
> >> brand new collection ... but the error messages suggest that we're still
> >> dealing with an index where you had one schema setting, indexed some
> >> data, then changed the schema without completely wiping out the index
> >> from the disk.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Shawn
> >>
> >>
>

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