Talk:Apache Solr

Should Solr be SOLR?

SOLR means "Searching On Lucene with Replication". It's a valid acronym. Yes, the company uses Solr as mixed case in their branding, but it is an acronym (they just style it as such). Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Popoki (talk • contribs) 22:39, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Whether we treat it as an acronym in the traditional sense or not, I do agree we should include the origin of the name in the article. 107.77.197.79 (talk) 15:34, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Integrating Solr

Typo3 is not a language, it's a CMS.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexrr123 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Why do we need a detailed listing of all 3rd party clients on a Wikipedia article? This belongs in the products home page or documentation. In this article we could just state that "There are native or third party clients available for most popular programming languages" Janhoy (talk) 10:43, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the table and authored some paragraphs about major integrations and that client libraries are available, referencing a Solr Wiki page Janhoy (talk) 11:18, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Untitled

Any ideas as to how to get this installed and working on XAMPP?

google knows, try https://sites.google.com/site/profileswapnilkulkarni/tech-talk/howtoinstallnutchandsolronubuntu1004

Style issue... "late northern-hemisphere fall 2004"? Why not just specify the month? Less confusing, more concise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.36.192.173 (talk) 14:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Marketing speak

There are a couple of emtional words on this page that sound like they came straight from the Marketing department. "powerful full-text search" - "powerful external configuration" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.185.144.122 (talk) 15:23, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the above and added the POV tag to mark that this article needs some neutrality touchups. - comment added by UltraAyla (talk • contribs) 23:23, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Stable Release

Why is the stable Release dated with June 5, when its actually mid of May at this moment? It is possibly the same date as from the Lucene site (May 6, 2013). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.178.208.6 (talk) 11:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Apache Solr. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120729142330/http://svn.apache.org:80/repos/asf/lucene/dev/trunk/solr/example/exampledocs/ to http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/dev/trunk/solr/example/exampledocs/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081210122038/http://www.ibm.com:80/developerworks/java/library/j-solr-update/? to http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-solr-update/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:11, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

incomprehensible sentence

this paragraph here :

In January 2009, solr & enterprise search Yonik Seeley along with Grant Ingersoll and Erik Hatcher went on to launch Lucidworks (formerly Lucid Imagination), being the first company providing commercial support and training for Apache Solr search technologies[citation needed]. Since then, support offerings around Solr has been abundant.

starts with a really weird "solr & enterprise search Yonik Seeley along with Grant Ingersoll and Erik Hatcher went on". should the "solr & enterprise search" part be removed ?

additionally, this paragraph has "support offerings around Solr has been" - probably "have been" ?

--Richlv (talk) 05:40, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

I tripped over that sentence as well, I've searched a bit through the history and it didn't always look like that. The paragraph was moved, and I think some bad copy-pasting occurred and that "solr & enterprise search" was a leftover from a previous sentence. I reckon that it should simply be removed, and I'll do this at once.

— Nyubis (talk) 14:57, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Apache Solr. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140706165443/http://searchhub.org/2012/05/21/solr-4-preview/ to http://searchhub.org/2012/05/21/solr-4-preview/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/dev/trunk/solr/example/exampledocs/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-solr-update/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:55, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

"Second most popular"

Solr is the second-most popular enterprise search engine after Elasticsearch.

I see how this relevant, given that the ranking exists. But should this really be in the opening paragraph? (Disclaimer: I am a Solr user).

185.64.51.58 (talk) 07:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

I suggest removing the reference entirely. The source, db-engines, is not authoritative and the methodology relies predominantly on english-language searches and social media content. In addition, at least one portion of the db-engine methodology is tailored to databases...

In order to count only relevant results, we are searching for <system name> together with the term database, e.g. "Oracle" and "database".

The following shows how inaccurate this is for Google searches, and presumably also for Bing and Yandex (the other sources db-engines uses):

Query	Count
solr	8,840,000
solr database	474,000

At best, the source measures "interest" rather than usage, and even then it does so in the context of databases, as shown above.

It's certainly accurate to say that solr is one of the most popular search engines, though I don't have a reliable quantification of that to cite.

104.129.194.181 (talk) 17:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)