Hm, I hadn't really thought about the minShouldMatch part, I thought it' d be
covered but I see your point being semantically different if you keep it as is.
However.. Running your edge case example on an actual local index I get the
following:
"(X X Y #X)" w/minshouldmatch=2 vs. (+X X Y) w/minshouldmatch=2 => same top
score, less results in second case."(X X Y #X)" w/minshouldmatch=2 vs. (+X X Y)
w/minshouldmatch=1 => same top score, same number of results"(X X X Y #X)"
w/minshouldmatch=3 vs. (+X X X Y) w/minshouldmatch=2 => same top score, same
number of results
But still not really convinced myself if decrementing minshouldmatch by 1 will
do the trick.. I'll have to verify - maybe I'll try more examples to see if it
holds as a general case.. Nice exercise either way :)
On Tuesday, August 9, 2016 12:40 AM, Chris Hostetter
<[email protected]> wrote:
Off the top of my head, i think any optimiation like that would also need
to account for minNrShouldMatch, wouldn't it?
if your query is "(X Y Z #X)" w/minshouldmatch=2, and you rewrite that
query to "(+X Y Z)" w/minshouldmatch=2 you now have a semantically diff
query that won't match as many documents as the original.
in that example, you could decrement minshouldmatch (=1) ... but i'm not
sure off that holds as a general rule for all possible permutations/values
... i'd have to think about it.
An interesting edge case to think about is "(X X Y #X)" w/minshouldmatch=2
... pretty sure that would give you very diff scores if you rewrote it to
"(+X X Y)" (or "(+X Y)") w/minshouldmatch=1
: Hello all, I noticed while debugging a query that BooleanQuery will
: rewrite itself to remove FILTER clauses that are also MUST as an
: optimization/simplification, which makes total sense. So (+f:x #f:x)
: will become (+f:x). However, shouldn't there also be another
: optimization to remove FILTER clauses that are also SHOULD, while
: converting them to MUST? So, for eg. query (f:x #f:x) will become
: (+f:x). I did an initial simple implementation and the tests seem to
: pass. Are there any cases where this does not hold?
:
:
-Hoss
http://www.lucidworks.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
