You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-user@lucene.apache.org by brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> on 2019/04/02 04:07:14 UTC
Re: Lucene migrate to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3
Hi,
The main idea to migrate to 6.6.5(not to 7.6.x) from 5.5.3 is to have
smooth upgrade by avoiding re-indexing of the data at this point of time.
Coming to the issue of not able to search the old data(which was indexed
with 5.5.3) when we upgrade to 6.6.5 is
> The old data search works fine if we use
LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(), but the same data search does not
work if we use LongPoint.newRangeQuery().
Below are the 2 questions running in my mind, could you please suggest on
this ?
1) How to overcome the issue to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
2) Is it good to go now with using LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange()
and later(after a year, assuming by that time the data exists would be
indexed with 6.x only) change using LongPoint.newRangeQuery() when mirating
to 7.x
thank you in advance!
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:53 PM Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> First I have to ask why not use something much more recent? 7.5 comes to
> mind.
>
> There’s not enough information here to say anything at all about what your
> problem might or might not be. “It doesn’t work” provides little to
> diagnose. You might want to review:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
>
> Best,
> Erick
>
> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:39 PM, brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Team,
> >
> > we want to migrate from lucene 5.5.3 to 6.6.5.
> > We see after upgraded to 6.6.5 we are not able to search the existing
> > data(which was managed with 5.5.3), are we missing anything here during
> > upgrade?
> >
> > --
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Sree
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
--
Thanks & Regards,
Sreeramabrahmam
Mob:+91-9535000477
Re: Lucene migrate to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3
Posted by brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>.
Ok, thank you...
On Thu, 4 Apr 2019, 13:08 Adrien Grand, <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Difference in performance, indexing speed and index size will greatly
> depend on the data. There is some data at
> https://www.elastic.co/blog/searching-numb3rs-in-5.0.
>
> FYI there is one known case when points perform worse than legacy
> numeric fields: exact queries on low-cardinality fields. But if you
> perform actual range queries on high-cardinality fields, you should
> see improvements.
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 7:45 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > Thank you for your response.
> > Yes moving to 8.0 will be the plan if we plan to re-index.
> >
> > Before we re-index would like to know few details which will help us to
> > decide further on that:
> >
> > In Lucene 6.0 migrate page(
> https://lucene.apache.org/core/6_0_0/MIGRATE.html)
> > it says "*PointValues replaces NumericField*"
> > and also says "*PointValues provides faster indexing and searching, a
> > smaller index size, and less heap used at search time. See
> > org.apache.lucene.index.PointValues for an introduction.*"
> > Could we please get the *statistics* for this Point values about the
> > performance on faster indexing and searching and also on the index size
> and
> > heap used ?
> >
> > Thank you in Advance!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 12:59 PM Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > IndexUpgrader would not help, you need to reindex indeed using your
> > > own Java program.
> > >
> > > If you plan to reindex, then you might want to look into going
> > > straight to Lucene 8.0 (latest).
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 9:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your response.
> > > >
> > > > Does the IndexUpgrader tool will help in order to re-index using
> > > LongPoint ?
> > > > Or
> > > > Do we need to create completely new Index using LongPoint by writing
> a
> > > java
> > > > programme ?
> > > > Or
> > > > any other tool or best way to do ?
> > > >
> > > > Thank you in Advance!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:17 PM Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > You got it right, you will need to reindex with LongPoint before
> being
> > > > > about to search with LongPoint#newRangeQuery. It's fine to keep
> using
> > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery until then.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 1:56 PM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for your response.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now that in 6.6.5 it recommends to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > > instead
> > > > > > of deprecated LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(),
> > > > > > So Does it means, we need to re-index old data using LongPoint so
> > > that it
> > > > > > is searchable in upgrade scenarios ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In general Lucene supports smooth migration to one next major
> > > version,
> > > > > > so now migrating to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3 can be made smooth with the
> > > help of
> > > > > > existing API changes alone in 6.6.5 ? any guidance on this will
> be
> > > > > helpful.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks in advance!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, 14:36 Adrien Grand, <jp...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Brahmam,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This isn't possible: data can only be searched with
> > > > > > > LongPoint#newRangeQuery if the field has been indexed with
> > > LongPoints.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:04 AM brahmam <
> sreerama.naga@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In continuation to the previous mail, we see for the second
> > > point the
> > > > > > > newly
> > > > > > > > added data after upgrade will not be searchable if we use
> > > > > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(). so the second point
> is
> > > > > invalid
> > > > > > > now.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So please suggest on the point 1 how to search old and new
> data
> > > using
> > > > > > > > LongPoint.newRangeQuery() only.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > thank you in advance!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:37 AM brahmam <
> sreerama.naga@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The main idea to migrate to 6.6.5(not to 7.6.x) from 5.5.3
> is
> > > to
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > smooth upgrade by avoiding re-indexing of the data at this
> > > point of
> > > > > > > time.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Coming to the issue of not able to search the old
> data(which
> > > was
> > > > > > > indexed
> > > > > > > > > with 5.5.3) when we upgrade to 6.6.5 is
> > > > > > > > > > The old data search works fine if we use
> > > > > > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(), but the same data
> > > search
> > > > > does
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > work if we use LongPoint.newRangeQuery().
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Below are the 2 questions running in my mind, could you
> please
> > > > > suggest
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > this ?
> > > > > > > > > 1) How to overcome the issue to use
> LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > > > > > > > > 2) Is it good to go now with using
> > > > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange()
> > > > > > > > > and later(after a year, assuming by that time the data
> exists
> > > > > would be
> > > > > > > > > indexed with 6.x only) change using
> LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > > when
> > > > > > > mirating
> > > > > > > > > to 7.x
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > thank you in advance!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:53 PM Erick Erickson <
> > > > > > > erickerickson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> First I have to ask why not use something much more
> recent?
> > > 7.5
> > > > > comes
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> mind.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> There’s not enough information here to say anything at all
> > > about
> > > > > what
> > > > > > > > >> your problem might or might not be. “It doesn’t work”
> provides
> > > > > little
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> diagnose. You might want to review:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Best,
> > > > > > > > >> Erick
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:39 PM, brahmam <
> > > sreerama.naga@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Hi Team,
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > we want to migrate from lucene 5.5.3 to 6.6.5.
> > > > > > > > >> > We see after upgraded to 6.6.5 we are not able to
> search the
> > > > > > > existing
> > > > > > > > >> > data(which was managed with 5.5.3), are we missing
> anything
> > > here
> > > > > > > during
> > > > > > > > >> > upgrade?
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > --
> > > > > > > > >> > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > > > > >> > Sree
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > > > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > > > > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > > > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Adrien
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Adrien
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Adrien
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Adrien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: Lucene migrate to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3
Posted by Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com>.
Difference in performance, indexing speed and index size will greatly
depend on the data. There is some data at
https://www.elastic.co/blog/searching-numb3rs-in-5.0.
FYI there is one known case when points perform worse than legacy
numeric fields: exact queries on low-cardinality fields. But if you
perform actual range queries on high-cardinality fields, you should
see improvements.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 7:45 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Thank you for your response.
> Yes moving to 8.0 will be the plan if we plan to re-index.
>
> Before we re-index would like to know few details which will help us to
> decide further on that:
>
> In Lucene 6.0 migrate page(https://lucene.apache.org/core/6_0_0/MIGRATE.html)
> it says "*PointValues replaces NumericField*"
> and also says "*PointValues provides faster indexing and searching, a
> smaller index size, and less heap used at search time. See
> org.apache.lucene.index.PointValues for an introduction.*"
> Could we please get the *statistics* for this Point values about the
> performance on faster indexing and searching and also on the index size and
> heap used ?
>
> Thank you in Advance!
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 12:59 PM Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > IndexUpgrader would not help, you need to reindex indeed using your
> > own Java program.
> >
> > If you plan to reindex, then you might want to look into going
> > straight to Lucene 8.0 (latest).
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 9:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your response.
> > >
> > > Does the IndexUpgrader tool will help in order to re-index using
> > LongPoint ?
> > > Or
> > > Do we need to create completely new Index using LongPoint by writing a
> > java
> > > programme ?
> > > Or
> > > any other tool or best way to do ?
> > >
> > > Thank you in Advance!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:17 PM Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > You got it right, you will need to reindex with LongPoint before being
> > > > about to search with LongPoint#newRangeQuery. It's fine to keep using
> > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery until then.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 1:56 PM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for your response.
> > > > >
> > > > > Now that in 6.6.5 it recommends to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > instead
> > > > > of deprecated LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(),
> > > > > So Does it means, we need to re-index old data using LongPoint so
> > that it
> > > > > is searchable in upgrade scenarios ?
> > > > >
> > > > > In general Lucene supports smooth migration to one next major
> > version,
> > > > > so now migrating to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3 can be made smooth with the
> > help of
> > > > > existing API changes alone in 6.6.5 ? any guidance on this will be
> > > > helpful.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks in advance!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, 14:36 Adrien Grand, <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Brahmam,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This isn't possible: data can only be searched with
> > > > > > LongPoint#newRangeQuery if the field has been indexed with
> > LongPoints.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In continuation to the previous mail, we see for the second
> > point the
> > > > > > newly
> > > > > > > added data after upgrade will not be searchable if we use
> > > > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(). so the second point is
> > > > invalid
> > > > > > now.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So please suggest on the point 1 how to search old and new data
> > using
> > > > > > > LongPoint.newRangeQuery() only.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > thank you in advance!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:37 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The main idea to migrate to 6.6.5(not to 7.6.x) from 5.5.3 is
> > to
> > > > have
> > > > > > > > smooth upgrade by avoiding re-indexing of the data at this
> > point of
> > > > > > time.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Coming to the issue of not able to search the old data(which
> > was
> > > > > > indexed
> > > > > > > > with 5.5.3) when we upgrade to 6.6.5 is
> > > > > > > > > The old data search works fine if we use
> > > > > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(), but the same data
> > search
> > > > does
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > work if we use LongPoint.newRangeQuery().
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Below are the 2 questions running in my mind, could you please
> > > > suggest
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > this ?
> > > > > > > > 1) How to overcome the issue to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > > > > > > > 2) Is it good to go now with using
> > > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange()
> > > > > > > > and later(after a year, assuming by that time the data exists
> > > > would be
> > > > > > > > indexed with 6.x only) change using LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > when
> > > > > > mirating
> > > > > > > > to 7.x
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > thank you in advance!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:53 PM Erick Erickson <
> > > > > > erickerickson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> First I have to ask why not use something much more recent?
> > 7.5
> > > > comes
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> mind.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> There’s not enough information here to say anything at all
> > about
> > > > what
> > > > > > > >> your problem might or might not be. “It doesn’t work” provides
> > > > little
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >> diagnose. You might want to review:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Best,
> > > > > > > >> Erick
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:39 PM, brahmam <
> > sreerama.naga@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Hi Team,
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > we want to migrate from lucene 5.5.3 to 6.6.5.
> > > > > > > >> > We see after upgraded to 6.6.5 we are not able to search the
> > > > > > existing
> > > > > > > >> > data(which was managed with 5.5.3), are we missing anything
> > here
> > > > > > during
> > > > > > > >> > upgrade?
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > --
> > > > > > > >> > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > > > >> > Sree
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
> > java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > > > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Adrien
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Adrien
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Adrien
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> >
> >
--
Adrien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Lucene migrate to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3
Posted by brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>.
Hi
Thank you for your response.
Yes moving to 8.0 will be the plan if we plan to re-index.
Before we re-index would like to know few details which will help us to
decide further on that:
In Lucene 6.0 migrate page(https://lucene.apache.org/core/6_0_0/MIGRATE.html)
it says "*PointValues replaces NumericField*"
and also says "*PointValues provides faster indexing and searching, a
smaller index size, and less heap used at search time. See
org.apache.lucene.index.PointValues for an introduction.*"
Could we please get the *statistics* for this Point values about the
performance on faster indexing and searching and also on the index size and
heap used ?
Thank you in Advance!
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 12:59 PM Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> IndexUpgrader would not help, you need to reindex indeed using your
> own Java program.
>
> If you plan to reindex, then you might want to look into going
> straight to Lucene 8.0 (latest).
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 9:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks for your response.
> >
> > Does the IndexUpgrader tool will help in order to re-index using
> LongPoint ?
> > Or
> > Do we need to create completely new Index using LongPoint by writing a
> java
> > programme ?
> > Or
> > any other tool or best way to do ?
> >
> > Thank you in Advance!
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:17 PM Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > You got it right, you will need to reindex with LongPoint before being
> > > about to search with LongPoint#newRangeQuery. It's fine to keep using
> > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery until then.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 1:56 PM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your response.
> > > >
> > > > Now that in 6.6.5 it recommends to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> instead
> > > > of deprecated LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(),
> > > > So Does it means, we need to re-index old data using LongPoint so
> that it
> > > > is searchable in upgrade scenarios ?
> > > >
> > > > In general Lucene supports smooth migration to one next major
> version,
> > > > so now migrating to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3 can be made smooth with the
> help of
> > > > existing API changes alone in 6.6.5 ? any guidance on this will be
> > > helpful.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks in advance!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, 14:36 Adrien Grand, <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Brahmam,
> > > > >
> > > > > This isn't possible: data can only be searched with
> > > > > LongPoint#newRangeQuery if the field has been indexed with
> LongPoints.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In continuation to the previous mail, we see for the second
> point the
> > > > > newly
> > > > > > added data after upgrade will not be searchable if we use
> > > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(). so the second point is
> > > invalid
> > > > > now.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So please suggest on the point 1 how to search old and new data
> using
> > > > > > LongPoint.newRangeQuery() only.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thank you in advance!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:37 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The main idea to migrate to 6.6.5(not to 7.6.x) from 5.5.3 is
> to
> > > have
> > > > > > > smooth upgrade by avoiding re-indexing of the data at this
> point of
> > > > > time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Coming to the issue of not able to search the old data(which
> was
> > > > > indexed
> > > > > > > with 5.5.3) when we upgrade to 6.6.5 is
> > > > > > > > The old data search works fine if we use
> > > > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(), but the same data
> search
> > > does
> > > > > not
> > > > > > > work if we use LongPoint.newRangeQuery().
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Below are the 2 questions running in my mind, could you please
> > > suggest
> > > > > on
> > > > > > > this ?
> > > > > > > 1) How to overcome the issue to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > > > > > > 2) Is it good to go now with using
> > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange()
> > > > > > > and later(after a year, assuming by that time the data exists
> > > would be
> > > > > > > indexed with 6.x only) change using LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> when
> > > > > mirating
> > > > > > > to 7.x
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > thank you in advance!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:53 PM Erick Erickson <
> > > > > erickerickson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> First I have to ask why not use something much more recent?
> 7.5
> > > comes
> > > > > to
> > > > > > >> mind.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> There’s not enough information here to say anything at all
> about
> > > what
> > > > > > >> your problem might or might not be. “It doesn’t work” provides
> > > little
> > > > > to
> > > > > > >> diagnose. You might want to review:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Best,
> > > > > > >> Erick
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:39 PM, brahmam <
> sreerama.naga@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Hi Team,
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > we want to migrate from lucene 5.5.3 to 6.6.5.
> > > > > > >> > We see after upgraded to 6.6.5 we are not able to search the
> > > > > existing
> > > > > > >> > data(which was managed with 5.5.3), are we missing anything
> here
> > > > > during
> > > > > > >> > upgrade?
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > --
> > > > > > >> > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > > >> > Sree
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
> java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Adrien
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Adrien
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Adrien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: Lucene migrate to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3
Posted by Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com>.
IndexUpgrader would not help, you need to reindex indeed using your
own Java program.
If you plan to reindex, then you might want to look into going
straight to Lucene 8.0 (latest).
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 9:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for your response.
>
> Does the IndexUpgrader tool will help in order to re-index using LongPoint ?
> Or
> Do we need to create completely new Index using LongPoint by writing a java
> programme ?
> Or
> any other tool or best way to do ?
>
> Thank you in Advance!
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:17 PM Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You got it right, you will need to reindex with LongPoint before being
> > about to search with LongPoint#newRangeQuery. It's fine to keep using
> > LegacyNumericRangeQuery until then.
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 1:56 PM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your response.
> > >
> > > Now that in 6.6.5 it recommends to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery() instead
> > > of deprecated LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(),
> > > So Does it means, we need to re-index old data using LongPoint so that it
> > > is searchable in upgrade scenarios ?
> > >
> > > In general Lucene supports smooth migration to one next major version,
> > > so now migrating to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3 can be made smooth with the help of
> > > existing API changes alone in 6.6.5 ? any guidance on this will be
> > helpful.
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, 14:36 Adrien Grand, <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Brahmam,
> > > >
> > > > This isn't possible: data can only be searched with
> > > > LongPoint#newRangeQuery if the field has been indexed with LongPoints.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > In continuation to the previous mail, we see for the second point the
> > > > newly
> > > > > added data after upgrade will not be searchable if we use
> > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(). so the second point is
> > invalid
> > > > now.
> > > > >
> > > > > So please suggest on the point 1 how to search old and new data using
> > > > > LongPoint.newRangeQuery() only.
> > > > >
> > > > > thank you in advance!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:37 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The main idea to migrate to 6.6.5(not to 7.6.x) from 5.5.3 is to
> > have
> > > > > > smooth upgrade by avoiding re-indexing of the data at this point of
> > > > time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Coming to the issue of not able to search the old data(which was
> > > > indexed
> > > > > > with 5.5.3) when we upgrade to 6.6.5 is
> > > > > > > The old data search works fine if we use
> > > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(), but the same data search
> > does
> > > > not
> > > > > > work if we use LongPoint.newRangeQuery().
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Below are the 2 questions running in my mind, could you please
> > suggest
> > > > on
> > > > > > this ?
> > > > > > 1) How to overcome the issue to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > > > > > 2) Is it good to go now with using
> > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange()
> > > > > > and later(after a year, assuming by that time the data exists
> > would be
> > > > > > indexed with 6.x only) change using LongPoint.newRangeQuery() when
> > > > mirating
> > > > > > to 7.x
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thank you in advance!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:53 PM Erick Erickson <
> > > > erickerickson@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> First I have to ask why not use something much more recent? 7.5
> > comes
> > > > to
> > > > > >> mind.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> There’s not enough information here to say anything at all about
> > what
> > > > > >> your problem might or might not be. “It doesn’t work” provides
> > little
> > > > to
> > > > > >> diagnose. You might want to review:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Best,
> > > > > >> Erick
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:39 PM, brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Hi Team,
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > we want to migrate from lucene 5.5.3 to 6.6.5.
> > > > > >> > We see after upgraded to 6.6.5 we are not able to search the
> > > > existing
> > > > > >> > data(which was managed with 5.5.3), are we missing anything here
> > > > during
> > > > > >> > upgrade?
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > --
> > > > > >> > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > >> > Sree
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Adrien
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Adrien
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> >
> >
--
Adrien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Lucene migrate to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3
Posted by brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Thanks for your response.
Does the IndexUpgrader tool will help in order to re-index using LongPoint ?
Or
Do we need to create completely new Index using LongPoint by writing a java
programme ?
Or
any other tool or best way to do ?
Thank you in Advance!
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:17 PM Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You got it right, you will need to reindex with LongPoint before being
> about to search with LongPoint#newRangeQuery. It's fine to keep using
> LegacyNumericRangeQuery until then.
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 1:56 PM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thanks for your response.
> >
> > Now that in 6.6.5 it recommends to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery() instead
> > of deprecated LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(),
> > So Does it means, we need to re-index old data using LongPoint so that it
> > is searchable in upgrade scenarios ?
> >
> > In general Lucene supports smooth migration to one next major version,
> > so now migrating to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3 can be made smooth with the help of
> > existing API changes alone in 6.6.5 ? any guidance on this will be
> helpful.
> >
> > Thanks in advance!
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, 14:36 Adrien Grand, <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Brahmam,
> > >
> > > This isn't possible: data can only be searched with
> > > LongPoint#newRangeQuery if the field has been indexed with LongPoints.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > In continuation to the previous mail, we see for the second point the
> > > newly
> > > > added data after upgrade will not be searchable if we use
> > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(). so the second point is
> invalid
> > > now.
> > > >
> > > > So please suggest on the point 1 how to search old and new data using
> > > > LongPoint.newRangeQuery() only.
> > > >
> > > > thank you in advance!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:37 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > The main idea to migrate to 6.6.5(not to 7.6.x) from 5.5.3 is to
> have
> > > > > smooth upgrade by avoiding re-indexing of the data at this point of
> > > time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Coming to the issue of not able to search the old data(which was
> > > indexed
> > > > > with 5.5.3) when we upgrade to 6.6.5 is
> > > > > > The old data search works fine if we use
> > > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(), but the same data search
> does
> > > not
> > > > > work if we use LongPoint.newRangeQuery().
> > > > >
> > > > > Below are the 2 questions running in my mind, could you please
> suggest
> > > on
> > > > > this ?
> > > > > 1) How to overcome the issue to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > > > > 2) Is it good to go now with using
> > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange()
> > > > > and later(after a year, assuming by that time the data exists
> would be
> > > > > indexed with 6.x only) change using LongPoint.newRangeQuery() when
> > > mirating
> > > > > to 7.x
> > > > >
> > > > > thank you in advance!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:53 PM Erick Erickson <
> > > erickerickson@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> First I have to ask why not use something much more recent? 7.5
> comes
> > > to
> > > > >> mind.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There’s not enough information here to say anything at all about
> what
> > > > >> your problem might or might not be. “It doesn’t work” provides
> little
> > > to
> > > > >> diagnose. You might want to review:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Best,
> > > > >> Erick
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:39 PM, brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Hi Team,
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > we want to migrate from lucene 5.5.3 to 6.6.5.
> > > > >> > We see after upgraded to 6.6.5 we are not able to search the
> > > existing
> > > > >> > data(which was managed with 5.5.3), are we missing anything here
> > > during
> > > > >> > upgrade?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > --
> > > > >> > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > >> > Sree
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Adrien
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Adrien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: Lucene migrate to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3
Posted by Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com>.
You got it right, you will need to reindex with LongPoint before being
about to search with LongPoint#newRangeQuery. It's fine to keep using
LegacyNumericRangeQuery until then.
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 1:56 PM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for your response.
>
> Now that in 6.6.5 it recommends to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery() instead
> of deprecated LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(),
> So Does it means, we need to re-index old data using LongPoint so that it
> is searchable in upgrade scenarios ?
>
> In general Lucene supports smooth migration to one next major version,
> so now migrating to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3 can be made smooth with the help of
> existing API changes alone in 6.6.5 ? any guidance on this will be helpful.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
>
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, 14:36 Adrien Grand, <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Brahmam,
> >
> > This isn't possible: data can only be searched with
> > LongPoint#newRangeQuery if the field has been indexed with LongPoints.
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > In continuation to the previous mail, we see for the second point the
> > newly
> > > added data after upgrade will not be searchable if we use
> > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(). so the second point is invalid
> > now.
> > >
> > > So please suggest on the point 1 how to search old and new data using
> > > LongPoint.newRangeQuery() only.
> > >
> > > thank you in advance!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:37 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > The main idea to migrate to 6.6.5(not to 7.6.x) from 5.5.3 is to have
> > > > smooth upgrade by avoiding re-indexing of the data at this point of
> > time.
> > > >
> > > > Coming to the issue of not able to search the old data(which was
> > indexed
> > > > with 5.5.3) when we upgrade to 6.6.5 is
> > > > > The old data search works fine if we use
> > > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(), but the same data search does
> > not
> > > > work if we use LongPoint.newRangeQuery().
> > > >
> > > > Below are the 2 questions running in my mind, could you please suggest
> > on
> > > > this ?
> > > > 1) How to overcome the issue to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > > > 2) Is it good to go now with using
> > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange()
> > > > and later(after a year, assuming by that time the data exists would be
> > > > indexed with 6.x only) change using LongPoint.newRangeQuery() when
> > mirating
> > > > to 7.x
> > > >
> > > > thank you in advance!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:53 PM Erick Erickson <
> > erickerickson@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> First I have to ask why not use something much more recent? 7.5 comes
> > to
> > > >> mind.
> > > >>
> > > >> There’s not enough information here to say anything at all about what
> > > >> your problem might or might not be. “It doesn’t work” provides little
> > to
> > > >> diagnose. You might want to review:
> > > >>
> > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
> > > >>
> > > >> Best,
> > > >> Erick
> > > >>
> > > >> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:39 PM, brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Hi Team,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > we want to migrate from lucene 5.5.3 to 6.6.5.
> > > >> > We see after upgraded to 6.6.5 we are not able to search the
> > existing
> > > >> > data(which was managed with 5.5.3), are we missing anything here
> > during
> > > >> > upgrade?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Thanks & Regards,
> > > >> > Sree
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Adrien
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> >
> >
--
Adrien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Lucene migrate to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3
Posted by brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Thanks for your response.
Now that in 6.6.5 it recommends to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery() instead
of deprecated LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(),
So Does it means, we need to re-index old data using LongPoint so that it
is searchable in upgrade scenarios ?
In general Lucene supports smooth migration to one next major version,
so now migrating to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3 can be made smooth with the help of
existing API changes alone in 6.6.5 ? any guidance on this will be helpful.
Thanks in advance!
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, 14:36 Adrien Grand, <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Brahmam,
>
> This isn't possible: data can only be searched with
> LongPoint#newRangeQuery if the field has been indexed with LongPoints.
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > In continuation to the previous mail, we see for the second point the
> newly
> > added data after upgrade will not be searchable if we use
> > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(). so the second point is invalid
> now.
> >
> > So please suggest on the point 1 how to search old and new data using
> > LongPoint.newRangeQuery() only.
> >
> > thank you in advance!
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:37 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The main idea to migrate to 6.6.5(not to 7.6.x) from 5.5.3 is to have
> > > smooth upgrade by avoiding re-indexing of the data at this point of
> time.
> > >
> > > Coming to the issue of not able to search the old data(which was
> indexed
> > > with 5.5.3) when we upgrade to 6.6.5 is
> > > > The old data search works fine if we use
> > > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(), but the same data search does
> not
> > > work if we use LongPoint.newRangeQuery().
> > >
> > > Below are the 2 questions running in my mind, could you please suggest
> on
> > > this ?
> > > 1) How to overcome the issue to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > > 2) Is it good to go now with using
> LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange()
> > > and later(after a year, assuming by that time the data exists would be
> > > indexed with 6.x only) change using LongPoint.newRangeQuery() when
> mirating
> > > to 7.x
> > >
> > > thank you in advance!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:53 PM Erick Erickson <
> erickerickson@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> First I have to ask why not use something much more recent? 7.5 comes
> to
> > >> mind.
> > >>
> > >> There’s not enough information here to say anything at all about what
> > >> your problem might or might not be. “It doesn’t work” provides little
> to
> > >> diagnose. You might want to review:
> > >>
> > >> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> Erick
> > >>
> > >> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:39 PM, brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi Team,
> > >> >
> > >> > we want to migrate from lucene 5.5.3 to 6.6.5.
> > >> > We see after upgraded to 6.6.5 we are not able to search the
> existing
> > >> > data(which was managed with 5.5.3), are we missing anything here
> during
> > >> > upgrade?
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Thanks & Regards,
> > >> > Sree
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > Sreeramabrahmam
> > > Mob:+91-9535000477
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Sreeramabrahmam
> > Mob:+91-9535000477
>
>
>
> --
> Adrien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Re: Lucene migrate to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3
Posted by Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com>.
Hi Brahmam,
This isn't possible: data can only be searched with
LongPoint#newRangeQuery if the field has been indexed with LongPoints.
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:04 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In continuation to the previous mail, we see for the second point the newly
> added data after upgrade will not be searchable if we use
> LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(). so the second point is invalid now.
>
> So please suggest on the point 1 how to search old and new data using
> LongPoint.newRangeQuery() only.
>
> thank you in advance!
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:37 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > The main idea to migrate to 6.6.5(not to 7.6.x) from 5.5.3 is to have
> > smooth upgrade by avoiding re-indexing of the data at this point of time.
> >
> > Coming to the issue of not able to search the old data(which was indexed
> > with 5.5.3) when we upgrade to 6.6.5 is
> > > The old data search works fine if we use
> > LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(), but the same data search does not
> > work if we use LongPoint.newRangeQuery().
> >
> > Below are the 2 questions running in my mind, could you please suggest on
> > this ?
> > 1) How to overcome the issue to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> > 2) Is it good to go now with using LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange()
> > and later(after a year, assuming by that time the data exists would be
> > indexed with 6.x only) change using LongPoint.newRangeQuery() when mirating
> > to 7.x
> >
> > thank you in advance!
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:53 PM Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> First I have to ask why not use something much more recent? 7.5 comes to
> >> mind.
> >>
> >> There’s not enough information here to say anything at all about what
> >> your problem might or might not be. “It doesn’t work” provides little to
> >> diagnose. You might want to review:
> >>
> >> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Erick
> >>
> >> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:39 PM, brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi Team,
> >> >
> >> > we want to migrate from lucene 5.5.3 to 6.6.5.
> >> > We see after upgraded to 6.6.5 we are not able to search the existing
> >> > data(which was managed with 5.5.3), are we missing anything here during
> >> > upgrade?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Thanks & Regards,
> >> > Sree
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Sreeramabrahmam
> > Mob:+91-9535000477
> >
>
>
> --
> Thanks & Regards,
> Sreeramabrahmam
> Mob:+91-9535000477
--
Adrien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Lucene migrate to 6.6.5 from 5.5.3
Posted by brahmam <sr...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
In continuation to the previous mail, we see for the second point the newly
added data after upgrade will not be searchable if we use
LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(). so the second point is invalid now.
So please suggest on the point 1 how to search old and new data using
LongPoint.newRangeQuery() only.
thank you in advance!
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:37 AM brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The main idea to migrate to 6.6.5(not to 7.6.x) from 5.5.3 is to have
> smooth upgrade by avoiding re-indexing of the data at this point of time.
>
> Coming to the issue of not able to search the old data(which was indexed
> with 5.5.3) when we upgrade to 6.6.5 is
> > The old data search works fine if we use
> LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange(), but the same data search does not
> work if we use LongPoint.newRangeQuery().
>
> Below are the 2 questions running in my mind, could you please suggest on
> this ?
> 1) How to overcome the issue to use LongPoint.newRangeQuery()
> 2) Is it good to go now with using LegacyNumericRangeQuery.newLongRange()
> and later(after a year, assuming by that time the data exists would be
> indexed with 6.x only) change using LongPoint.newRangeQuery() when mirating
> to 7.x
>
> thank you in advance!
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 8:53 PM Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> First I have to ask why not use something much more recent? 7.5 comes to
>> mind.
>>
>> There’s not enough information here to say anything at all about what
>> your problem might or might not be. “It doesn’t work” provides little to
>> diagnose. You might want to review:
>>
>> https://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
>>
>> Best,
>> Erick
>>
>> > On Mar 27, 2019, at 10:39 PM, brahmam <sr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Team,
>> >
>> > we want to migrate from lucene 5.5.3 to 6.6.5.
>> > We see after upgraded to 6.6.5 we are not able to search the existing
>> > data(which was managed with 5.5.3), are we missing anything here during
>> > upgrade?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Thanks & Regards,
>> > Sree
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> --
> Thanks & Regards,
> Sreeramabrahmam
> Mob:+91-9535000477
>
--
Thanks & Regards,
Sreeramabrahmam
Mob:+91-9535000477