By the address:
http://myhost.com:8983/solr/#/collection1/query
I can not find the possibility for inputing GROUP queries, like:
group=true&group.field=geohash1_st
Where is fields for that type of query?
That is what I have:
P.S: I have solr 4 version.
P.S2: I can type my query into URL of my browser, but it is not convenient, because the query is long! So the question is to make that using prepared input fields...
The place you'd put those is labelled "Raw Query Parameters" ... but it's not in your screenshot. This probably means that you're not using a new enough version of Solr 4. I can confirm that this is in the admin UI as of version 4.2.1, and it's definitely in the latest version, 4.6.0.
You disappeared from #solr before I could answer there.
I faced same issue.
I have done like this :
We need to send parameter on : Raw Query Parameters
stats.facet=Status&stats.field=ItemPrice&stats=on&wt=json
stats.facet=Status - It means group by Status.
stats.field=ItemPrice - It means Sum,min,max,sd.. macro aggregation will be done on ItemPrice.
stats=on It enable the stats
Result will contain Stats like below :
"stats":{
"stats_fields":{
"ItemPrice":{
"min":1.0,
"max":1399.99,
"count":8,
"missing":0,
"sum":3147.9399999999987,
"sumOfSquares":3063146.2605999997,
"mean":393.49249999999984,
"stddev":510.5257066635194,
"facets":{
"Status":{
"6":{
"min":1.0,
"max":1399.99,
"count":8,
"missing":0,
"sum":3147.9399999999987,
"sumOfSquares":3063146.2605999997,
"mean":393.49249999999984,
"stddev":510.5257066635194}}}}}}}
Related
Is it possible to query for users, filtered by an X500 proxy address?
Using the following query which filters by an SMTP address, I can return all of my proxy addresses:
/v1.0/users/?$filter=proxyAddresses/any(x:x eq 'smtp:me#here.com')&$select=proxyAddresses
However, if I take one of the X500 addresses that was returned in the above query and try and filter by that:
/v1.0/users/?$filter=proxyAddresses/any(x:x eq 'x500:/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (blahblah)/cn=Recipients/cn=trimmed')&$select=proxyAddresses
then I get a 400:
{
"error": {
"code": "Request_UnsupportedQuery",
"message": "Unsupported or invalid query filter clause specified for property 'proxyAddresses' of resource 'User'.",
"innerError": {
"request-id": "adcdefg",
"date": "2019-01-01T01:01:01"
}
}
}
I've tried URL encoding the address, and also tried with and without the "X500:" scheme.
Is filtering by X500 address supported?
I am able to use X500 addresses as filters without any modification to the address from a clone of GraphExplorer. The following queries both return the correct user record
https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/users/?$filter=proxyAddresses/any(x:x eq 'x500:/o=Company Exchange/ou=First Administrative Group/cn=Recipients/cn=UIDHere')&$select=proxyAddresses
and
https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/users/?$filter=proxyAddresses/any(x:x eq 'X500:/o=Company Exchange/ou=External (FYDIBOHF25SPDLT)/cn=Recipients/cn=z804261192zc46c4az4f6032z322540z')&$select=proxyAddresses
Like Lisa - this is not about parenthesis. I have Any lambda queries on proxyAddresses using X500 addresses containing parentheses that working just fine in Graph Explorer.
I suspect that the issue is actually size of the search string. I repro the error if the size of the search string is greater than 120 characters.
I'm following up with the engineering team.
In the meantime Paul, as a workaround (and excuse my lack of X500 knowledge), is there a way to query using the shortest X500 string?
Hope this helps,
As Dan Kershaw answered - this does seem to be a hard coded limit of 120 characters in the email address being filtered on.
A simple workaround is to trim the email address (including the scheme - "x500:" or "smtp:") to 120 characters, and search using a "startswith":
/v1.0/users/?$filter=proxyAddresses/any(x:startswith(x, 'x500:/o=ExchangeLabs/ou=Exchange Administrative Group (blahblah)/cn=Recipients/cn=trimmed'))&$select=proxyAddresses
This may return more than one match, so its then a case of looking through each returned user, and looking at their "proxyAddresses" collection to see which matches the original untrimmed email address that's being searched for.
I can confirm that this is still an issue as of today's date.
I'm actually using the AzureAD PowerShell cmdlets, which leverage the Graph API.
I couldn't figure out why my query was failing until I found this thread, so thanks for that.
I was getting essentially the same error message in PowerShell:
"Unsupported or invalid query filter clause specified for property 'proxyAddresses' of resource 'Group'."
When I took a substring of the first 120 characters and ran a startsWith, it worked fine.
It's a shame that this issue still hasn't been resolved.
I am trying to upgrade my Solr 4.x version to 5.2.1 Solrcloud implementation. I had written following code to get all the results from Sorl query which works well in Solr single instance mode.
SolrQuery query = new SolrQuery();
query.setQuery("*:*");
query.addSort("agent_status", ORDER.desc);
query.addFilterQuery("account_id:\"" + accountId + "\"");
query.set("rows", Integer.MAX_VALUE);
But code will not work well in SolrCloud implemenation.It throws following exception.
2015-08-14 16:44:45,648 ERROR [solr.core.SolrCore] - [http-8080-8] : java.lang.NegativeArraySizeException
at org.apache.lucene.util.PriorityQueue.<init>(PriorityQueue.java:58)
at org.apache.lucene.util.PriorityQueue.<init>(PriorityQueue.java:39)
at org.apache.solr.handler.component.ShardFieldSortedHitQueue.<init>(ShardDoc.java:113)
at org.apache.solr.handler.component.QueryComponent.mergeIds(QueryComponent.java:972)
at org.apache.solr.handler.component.QueryComponent.handleRegularResponses(QueryComponent.java:750)
at org.apache.solr.handler.component.QueryComponent.handleResponses(QueryComponent.java:729)
at org.apache.solr.handler.component.SearchHandler.handleRequestBody(SearchHandler.java:388)
at org.apache.solr.handler.RequestHandlerBase.handleRequest(RequestHandlerBase.java:143)
I found that it is failing because of query.set("rows", Integer.MAX_VALUE) statement.People suggested me to use pagination.
But, I can not afford doing pagination as there will be too many changes at UI side.
There is one more way where I can first query with some small number & get total number of documents using response.getResults().getNumFound() method & try setting that value to setRows method.But this approach will increase one more call to server.
Is there any other way I can solve this problem?
You can always set your rows to be a large value that would encompass your results. Integer.MAX_VALUE will not work due to the size limits of Java Arrays (see here) and the Lucene Priority Queue (see lines 42 - 58).
Solr-534 requested to have essentially what your asking for; there is some good conversation about why and why-not such a feature would be good.
A better question might be how many documents can the UI hold without becoming unusable? However many documents that is, would be a good value for your query to return.
I have trouble with Apache Solr now.
I wonder if there is any difference with 2 query:
status:1 AND province:D500 AND district:014 AND precinct:008 AND name:*THÔN 22*
I have parsedquery_toString": "+status:1 +province:D500 +district:014 +precinct:008 +name:*thôn _text:22*"
and with the second one:
status:1 AND name:*THÔN 22* AND province:D500 AND district:014 AND precinct:008
I have
"parsedquery_toString": "+status:1 +name:*thôn +_text:22* +province:D500 +district:014 +precinct:008",
What makes the parsequery_toString to be so different with just the changes of orders of query?
It could be the result of the space in *THÔN 22*, and how it changes the query. If it's a single search term instead of two, try quoting it and see if you get the same results then.
I have a situation where I have to search a document in Solr with multiple OR keywords. Now the number of keywords may lead up to 5000 which is resulting in a awfully large query with 5000 OR conditions. This is resulting in the Solr server to hang. Is there any other way I can design the query to work. Short sample of the query is given below
tweet_id:337931022601699328 OR 337931064293081089 OR 337931089538584576 OR 337931098761871361 OR 337931138851016704 OR 337931143099854848 OR 337931160082591745 OR 337931163857453056 OR 337931230819516416 OR 337931239996665857 OR 337931287518126080 OR 337931322850951168 OR 337931325648535553 OR 337931331398934528 OR 337931413057830912 OR 337931442363441152 OR 337931448629731329 OR 337931453344129025 OR 337931465016877056 OR 337931482066726912 OR 337931514388029442 OR 337931533149155328 OR 337931645527130114 OR 337931704935256064 OR 337931784459268096 OR 337931845545103360 OR 337931889086185472 OR 337931892668108801 OR 337931963983855617 OR 337932154212319233 OR 337932176454721536 OR 337932193198374912 OR 337932229659459584 OR 337932437290090496 OR 337932436807749632 OR 337932436828725250 OR 337932437449474048 OR 337932448518250496 OR 337932458832035843 OR 337932458634915840 OR 337932458278387712 OR 337932474246119425 OR 337932476209041409 OR 337932477408620544 OR 337932480478842880 OR 337932478775959554 OR 337932480566931456 OR 337932478763376640 OR 337932481841999872 OR 337932479337992192 OR 337932479296045057 OR 337932479333797889 OR 337932484614434816 OR 337932484606038017 OR 337932482777317376 OR 337932484664758272 OR 337932482785718273 OR 337932484589273088 OR 337932487399444481 OR 337932489031032833 OR 337932489114923008 OR 337932486573166592 OR 337932490704560130 OR 337932489144270848 OR 337932488762601472 OR 337932492097069056 OR 337932497780355072 OR 337932498900230144 OR 337932499722321921 OR 337932514431729665 OR 337932561806409731 OR 337932567284154368 OR 337932567300935680 OR 337932574603214848 OR 337932571134533632 OR 337932574674518016 OR 337932575484026881 OR 337932578206121984 OR 337932582215892994 OR 337932586653454336 OR 337932584917024768 OR 337932592986865664 OR 337932597017587712 ....
I intend to facet the result based on a few fields.
I'm not sure whether this solution would help you or not, but tried something for your problem.
Whatever the query you provide to Solr, first it parses that query to it's understandable format. Then Solr executes that for result. You have to do some calculations before querying to Solr. Let's take the following scenario to solve your use case.
Suppose You have total 5000 tweet_id. You have to do an OR query on around 4000 tweet_id. In this type of scenario, it's better to query on other (5000-4000=1000) 1000 tweet_id with negation AND query. So, your query will have less values passed.
So, try querying with rest of the tweet_id with negation AND query instead of OR query.
If I were you, I'd create a new field denoting this custom_list_id .. Whenever you generate a new list, index the new data then query by the list I'd.
Is it possible to conduct multiple spatial queries within the same SOLR (3.1+) request?
We currently have a need to allow user to search for inventory with a location of their choice via a frontend search form. But we want to also add another spatial search behind the scenes so it will include more inventory. The resulting search would result in a venn diagram type of search.
Edit 10.4.2011
Example construct: q=*:*&fq={!geofilt}&sfield=Location&(ClientId:"client1"&pt=40.68063802521456,-74.00390625&d=80.4672)%20OR%20_query_:(ClientId:"client2"&pt=36.1146460,-115.1728160&d=80.4672)
The above construct does not work, but hopefully demonstrates what I am trying to accomplish.
This is old, but it doesn't seem like it ever got a full answer. I had the same issue and found that this syntax works:
q =*:*& fq = (({
!geofilt sfield = Location pt = 40.68063802521456,
-74.00390625 d = 80.4672
}
AND ClientId : "client1")OR({
!geofilt sfield = Location pt = 36.1146460,
-115.1728160 d = 80.4672
}
AND ClientId : "client2"))
It looks like, you like to run N querys in one request in order to get one result set per query?!
So Field Collapsing ( http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FieldCollapsing ) is what you are looking for. Unfortunately FieldCollapsing is only available from 3.3.
Depending on your needs, maybe counted results from different faceted searches could be also useful?!
What if you moved your second location query into an additional filter query, like below:
q=*:*&fq={!geofilt}&sfield=Location&(ClientId:"client1"&pt=40.68063802521456,-74.00390625&d=80.4672)&fq={!geofilt}&sfield=Location&(ClientId:"client2"&pt=36.1146460,-115.1728160&d=80.4672)
Will that provide the results that you are looking for? It might end up being too limiting, but thought it was worth trying.
You might also try:
q=*:*&fq={!geofilt}&sfield=Location&((ClientId:"client1"&pt=40.68063802521456,-74.00390625&d=80.4672)%20OR%20(ClientId:"client2"&pt=36.1146460,-115.1728160&d=80.4672))