You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to solr-user@lucene.apache.org by Marc Sturlese <ma...@gmail.com> on 2009/09/03 16:42:52 UTC

Best way to do a lucene matchAllDocs not using q.alt=*:*

Hey there,
I need a query to get the total number of documents in my index. I can get
if I do this using DismaxRequestHandler:
q.alt=*:*&facet=false&hl=false&rows=0
I have noticed this query is very memory consuming. Is there any more
optimized way in trunk to get the total number of documents of my index?
Thanks in advanced

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Best-way-to-do-a-lucene-matchAllDocs-not-using-q.alt%3D*%3A*-tp25277585p25277585.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Re: Best way to do a lucene matchAllDocs not using q.alt=*:*

Posted by Shalin Shekhar Mangar <sh...@gmail.com>.
The statistics page will also give you numDocs (it is an xml response).

On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:24 AM, Uri Boness <ub...@gmail.com> wrote:

> you can use LukeRequestHandler http://localhost:8983/solr/admin/luke
>
>
> Marc Sturlese wrote:
>
>> Hey there,
>> I need a query to get the total number of documents in my index. I can get
>> if I do this using DismaxRequestHandler:
>> q.alt=*:*&facet=false&hl=false&rows=0
>> I have noticed this query is very memory consuming. Is there any more
>> optimized way in trunk to get the total number of documents of my index?
>> Thanks in advanced
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.

Re: Best way to do a lucene matchAllDocs not using q.alt=*:*

Posted by Uri Boness <ub...@gmail.com>.
you can use LukeRequestHandler http://localhost:8983/solr/admin/luke

Marc Sturlese wrote:
> Hey there,
> I need a query to get the total number of documents in my index. I can get
> if I do this using DismaxRequestHandler:
> q.alt=*:*&facet=false&hl=false&rows=0
> I have noticed this query is very memory consuming. Is there any more
> optimized way in trunk to get the total number of documents of my index?
> Thanks in advanced
>
>