Thanks Yonik, Should I open a Solr JIRA issue?
Tom -----Original Message----- From: ysee...@gmail.com [mailto:ysee...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Yonik Seeley Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 1:16 PM To: dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: LUCENE-167 and Solr default handling of Boolean operators is broken Whew, that was a while ago - didn't remember even commenting on the issue, but it still makes sense (double-negative aside... boy I hate re-reading things I wrote to quickly ;-) The old precedence query parser had issues IIRC. The precedence query parser based on the flexible queryparser framework in contrib isn't that Solr friendly (i.e. Solr has a lot of hooks into the current standard query parser and moving would probably be both error prone and difficult). SolrCloud is consuming my time right now, but I might be able to take look to see if this is easy to fix in another month or so (if no one beats me to it). Since it's a major release, we may be able to just fix it in trunk w/o having to keep the old behavior. -Yonik http://www.lucidimagination.com On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Burton-West, Tom <tburt...@umich.edu> wrote: > The default query parser in Solr does not handle precedence of Boolean > operators in the way most people expect. > > "A AND B OR C" gets interpreted as "A AND (B OR C)" . There are numerous > other examples in the JIRA ticket for Lucene 167, this article on the wiki > http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/BooleanQuerySyntax and in this blog post: > http://robotlibrarian.billdueber.com/solr-and-boolean-operators/ > > This issue was reported in 2003 but the fix does not seem to have made it > into the default query parser for either Lucene or Solr > > It appears that Lucene 167 was closed in 2009 based on the assumption that > the query parser in Lucene 1823 would become the default Lucene query > parser. However 1823 seems to have gotten bogged down and is not yet > resolved. I do see that there is a precedence query parser in LUCENE-1937 > which was committed to contrib. in the 3x > branch:(http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/dev/branches/branch_3x/lucene/contrib/queryparser/src/java/org/apache/lucene/queryParser/precedence/package.html?view=co) > > Would it be possible to use the contrib 3x precedence query parser in Solr? > Would this require modifying the LuceneQParserPlugin and if so would it make > sense to open a JIRA issue? > > Are there any plans to make the precedence query parser the default for > either Lucene or Solr? > > If not, are there any plans to make it more prominent in the documentation > that the default Lucene query parser has issues with precedence? > > > A bit more background below > > Tom Burton-West > http://www.hathitrust.org/blogs/large-scale-search > ---------------------------------------------------- > > More Background > > There were some concerns about breaking backward compatibility but in a > mailing list post in 2005 Yonik Sealy said: > "The current behavior is so surprising that I doubt that no one is > relying on it." > (http://www.mail-archive.com/java-user@lucene.apache.org/msg00018.html) > > and Doug Cutting said "+1. Fixing operator precedence seems to me like an > acceptable incompatibility. The change needs to be well documented in > release notes, and the old QueryParser should be available, deprecated, for > a time for back-compatibility." > (http://www.mail-archive.com/java-user@lucene.apache.org/msg00037.html) > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
