> > I will give this a go, but was wondering whether this is something others
> > have done?
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Edd
> >
> >
> > Edward Turner
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 13:58, Edward Turner wro
> Edd
>
>
> Edward Turner
>
>
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 13:58, Edward Turner wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We are experiencing some unexpected behaviour for phrase queries which we
>> believe might be related to the FlattenGraphFilterFa
ward Turner
On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 13:58, Edward Turner wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We are experiencing some unexpected behaviour for phrase queries which we
> believe might be related to the FlattenGraphFilterFactory and stopwords.
>
> Brief description: when performing a phrase query
Hi all,
We are experiencing some unexpected behaviour for phrase queries which we
believe might be related to the FlattenGraphFilterFactory and stopwords.
Brief description: when performing a phrase query
"Molecular cloning and evolution of the" => we get expected hits
"Mol
Check your “df” parameter in all your handlers in solrconfig.xml.
Second, add "&debug=query” to the query and look at the parsed
return, you’ll probably see something field qualified by “text:….”
Offhand, though, I don’t see where that’s happening in your query.
wait, how are you submitting this
On 6/15/2020 2:52 PM, Deepu wrote:
sample query is
"{!complexphrase inOrder=true}(all_text_txt_enus:\"by\\ test*\") AND
(({!terms f=product_id_l}959945,959959,959960,959961,959962,959963)
AND (date_created_at_rdt:[2020-04-07T01:23:09Z TO *} AND
date_created_at_rdt:{* TO 2020-04-07T01:24:57Z]))"
Hi All,
i am trying to use {!complexphrasequeryparser inOrder=true} along with
other text fields. i am using solrj client to initiate the request.
sample query is
"{!complexphrase inOrder=true}(all_text_txt_enus:\"by\\ test*\") AND
(({!terms f=product_id_l}959945,959959,959960,959961,959962,95996
Hi AshB, from what I see, this is the expected behavior.
You pass this efi to your "isPook" feature : efi.query=thrones%20of%20game*.
Then you calculate:
{
"name" : "isPook",
"class" : "org.apache.solr.ltr.feature.SolrFeature",
"params" : {
"fq": ["{!type=edismax qf=*text* v
Phrase query is not working when applied in LTR.
Feature supplied is
{
"name" : "isPook",
"class" : "org.apache.solr.ltr.feature.SolrFeature",
"params" : {
"fq": ["{!type=edismax qf=text v=$qq}&qq=\"$
Did you manage to solve the problem? I have the same problem and would like
to know a solution.
Chien Nguyen wrote
> Many thank. I will try it.
--
Sent from: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-User-f472068.html
t back.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Hanjan, Harinder [mailto:harinder.han...@calgary.ca]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2018 5:01 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: [EXT] Type ahead functionality using complex phrase query parser
>
> Hello!
>
>
@lucene.apache.org
Subject: [EXT] Type ahead functionality using complex phrase query parser
Hello!
I can't get Solr to give the results I would expect, would appreciate if
someone could point me in the right direction here.
/select?q={!complexphrase}"gar*"
shows me the following terms
-
Hello!
I can't get Solr to give the results I would expect, would appreciate if
someone could point me in the right direction here.
/select?q={!complexphrase}"gar*"
shows me the following terms
-garages
-garburator
-gardening
-gardens
-garage
-
)
> | repeatexp {n,m} (n to m occurrences, including both)
>
>
> Does Solr support multiple occurrence of terms in a phrase query? For
> example: name:”abc{0, 3} def”, which means term “abc” repeats 0 to 3 times
> in the phrase.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chuming
>
>
--
Sincerely yours
Mikhail Khludnev
+ (one or more occurrences)
| repeatexp {n} (n occurrences)
| repeatexp {n,} (n or more occurrences)
| repeatexp {n,m} (n to m occurrences, including both)
Does Solr support multiple occurrence of terms in a phrase query? For example:
name:”abc{0, 3} def”, which
Thanks Shawn. Now I understand why my query without slop worked on the old
system, not new one.
On top of this NGram phrase query, I also want to do some wildcards. I used
complex phrase in my query.
{!complexphrase inOrder=true}sequence:"KK?” worked
debug":{
"
On 11/16/2017 8:40 AM, Chuming Chen wrote:
> I think the position is the issue, but how do I fix it? Is something wrong
> with my index analyzer or just my query is not right? I need to do phrase
> query, order is important here.
>
> I tried “KKS KSA”~1 in the query, it worked. H
Hi Shawn,
I think the position is the issue, but how do I fix it? Is something wrong with
my index analyzer or just my query is not right? I need to do phrase query,
order is important here.
I tried “KKS KSA”~1 in the query, it worked. However, if I do "KKS KSA SAR”~1,
it didn’t work,
*query* doesn't match
is that the relative *positions* don't match. In your query, the terms
are at position 1 and 2, but in the *index*, all the terms are at
position 1. Because the query has quotes, it is a phrase query, which
means that positions matter. With the query terms at
Hi Rick,
Thanks for response.
I understood that If I do not use StopFilter factory or do not exclude stop
words , than it will solve problem.
But here stop words excluded and search is working well with stop word in
phrase query.. but fast vector highlighter does not highlighting.
I debug the
Recent discussions have recommended that you not use stop words in any case.
Cheers -- Rick
On August 21, 2017 11:47:11 AM EDT, Jagdish Vasani
wrote:
>Hi Solr Users,
>
>I come across issue that fast Vector highlighter does not highlight
>field values when search for phrase query c
es when search for phrase query contains stop word.
> For example , Query is "blue is the sky" , it will return result but
> highlighting will not available for this field.
>
> I have applied,
> hl.usePhraseHighlighter=true
> hl.preserveMulti=true
> hl.highlightMulti
Hi Solr Users,
I come across issue that fast Vector highlighter does not highlight field
values when search for phrase query contains stop word.
For example , Query is "blue is the sky" , it will return result but
highlighting will not available for this field.
I ha
If you'd include the actual error message you get .. it might easier to try
and help?
-Stefan
On Jun 28, 2017 6:24 PM, "Michael Craven" wrote:
> Hi -
>
> I am trying to use the complex phrase query parser on my Drupal
> installation. Our core is sore 4.9.1, so I thou
Hi -
I am trying to use the complex phrase query parser on my Drupal installation.
Our core is sore 4.9.1, so I thought it should be no problem. Search works fine
when I use a local parameter to do a search of type lucene, dismax, or edismax,
(a la {!lucene} etc.), but when I try to do a
e matching to be unordered matching. You’ll
> >> have to set ps=0, if using edismax, to get exact order phrase matches.
> >>
> >>Erik
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jun 12, 2017, at 1:09 AM, Aman Deep Singh <
> amandeep.coo...@gmail
ote:
>>
>> Using ps=5 causes the phrase matching to be unordered matching. You’ll
>> have to set ps=0, if using edismax, to get exact order phrase matches.
>>
>>Erik
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 12, 2017, at 1:09 AM, Aman Deep Singh
>> wrote:
&g
uot;Erik Hatcher" wrote:
>
> Using ps=5 causes the phrase matching to be unordered matching. You’ll
> have to set ps=0, if using edismax, to get exact order phrase matches.
>
>Erik
>
>
>> On Jun 12, 2017, at 1:09 AM, Aman Deep Singh
> wrote:
>&g
2-Jun-2017 5:44 PM, "Erik Hatcher" wrote:
Using ps=5 causes the phrase matching to be unordered matching. You’ll
have to set ps=0, if using edismax, to get exact order phrase matches.
Erik
> On Jun 12, 2017, at 1:09 AM, Aman Deep Singh
wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I'm
Using ps=5 causes the phrase matching to be unordered matching. You’ll have
to set ps=0, if using edismax, to get exact order phrase matches.
Erik
> On Jun 12, 2017, at 1:09 AM, Aman Deep Singh
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I'm using a phrase query ,but it was applying
Hi,
I'm using a phrase query ,but it was applying the phrase boost to the query
where terms are in reverse order also ,which i don't want.Is their any way
to avoid the phrase boost for reverse order and apply boost only in case of
terms are in same sequence
Solr version 6.5.1
Many thank. I will try it.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-uppercase-inside-phrase-query-tp4337403p4337787.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Many thank. I will try it
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-uppercase-inside-phrase-query-tp4337403p4337786.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
gt;>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >> words="stopwords.txt"/>
>>> >> ignoreCase="true" expand="true"/>
>>> >> generateWordParts="1"
>>> generateNumberParts="1 catenateWords="0" catenateNumbers="0"
>>> catenateAll="0"
>>> splitOnCaseChange="1"/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >> protected="protwords.txt"/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble
>>> .com/Solr-uppercase-inside-phrase-query-tp4337403.html
>>> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>
>>
t"/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > words="stopwords.txt"/>
>> > ignoreCase="true" expand="true"/>
>> > generateWordParts="1"
>> generateNumberParts="1 catenateWords="0" catenateNumbers="0"
>> catenateAll="0"
>> splitOnCaseChange="1"/>
>>
>>
>>
>> > protected="protwords.txt"/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble
>> .com/Solr-uppercase-inside-phrase-query-tp4337403.html
>> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
>
rateWordParts="1"
> generateNumberParts="1 catenateWords="0" catenateNumbers="0"
> catenateAll="0"
> splitOnCaseChange="1"/>
>
>
>
> protected="protwords.txt"/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.
> nabble.com/Solr-uppercase-inside-phrase-query-tp4337403.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-uppercase-inside-phrase-query-tp4337403.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
make the correct job for greek language
If we use ICUFoldingFilterFactory filter, single word search works well but
if we use a regex query or search for a phrase query, that we used before
the filter ICUFolding
guage
> positionIncrementGap="1000">
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> If we use ICUFoldingFilterFactory filter, single word search works well but
> if we use a re
or search for a phrase query, that we used
before the filter ICUFoldingFilterFactory installation, do not work.
positionIncrementGap="1000">
We have
Hi,
I think synonym_edismax is not part of solr.
Can you re-produce with the stock edismax?
On Monday, June 20, 2016 12:34 PM, preeti kumari wrote:
Hi All,
My query looks like below :
q=((_query_:"{!synonym_edismax qf='partnum' v='597871' bq='' mm=100
synonyms=true synonyms.constructPhra
Hi All,
My query looks like below :
q=((_query_:"{!synonym_edismax qf='partnum' v='597871' bq='' mm=100
synonyms=true synonyms.constructPhrases=true
synonyms.ignoreQueryOperators=true}") OR (partnumcomp:597871* OR
partnum:"597871"~4 OR ngramc:"597 978 787 871"~4 OR partnumngramc:"597 978
787 871
the index size.
> For the general case, though, regular expressions may indeed require a full
> index scan. Seems like all I can do in that case is to warn the user in
> advance that this may take a (long) while.
>
> Any further ideas on how to reduce the performance hit and survive the
-
From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 7:43 PM
To: solr-user
Subject: Re: How to use a regex search within a phrase query?
Erez:
Before going too far down this path, understand that even if you can get this
syntax to work, you're going to pay a _ve
y across term boundaries. The pure
> regex is good as long I'm querying for a single term.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ahmet Arslan [mailto:iori...@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 4:49 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; Erez Michalak
> Subje
ingle term.
-Original Message-
From: Ahmet Arslan [mailto:iori...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 4:49 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; Erez Michalak
Subject: Re: How to use a regex search within a phrase query?
Hi Erez,
I don't think it is possible to combine regex with ph
16 1:37 PM, Erez Michalak wrote:
Hey,
I'm developing a search application based on SOLR 5.3.1, and would like to add
to it regex search capabilities on a specific tokenized text field named
'content'.
Is it possible to combine the default regex syntax within a phrase query
Hey,
I'm developing a search application based on SOLR 5.3.1, and would like to add
to it regex search capabilities on a specific tokenized text field named
'content'.
Is it possible to combine the default regex syntax within a phrase query (and
moreover, within a proximity
Erik, here is some context :
- migration from solr 4.10.4 to 5.4.1.
- we have our own synonym implementation that do not use solr
synonym mechanism: at the time, we needed to manage multi token synonym
and it wasn't covered by the Lucene features. So basically we
- let' say that
Gerald - I don’t quite understand, sorry - perhaps best if you could post your
code (or some test version you can work with and share here) so we can see what
exactly you’re trying to do.Maybe there’s other ways to achieve what you
want, maybe with somehow leveraging a StopFilter-like facili
On 02/02/2016 03:20 PM, Erik Hatcher wrote:
On Feb 2, 2016, at 8:57 AM, Elodie Sannier wrote:
Hello,
We are using solr 4.10.4 and we want to update to 5.4.1.
With solr 4.10.4:
- we extend PhraseQuery with a custom class in order to remove some
terms from phrase queries with phrase slop (updat
> On Feb 2, 2016, at 8:57 AM, Elodie Sannier wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> We are using solr 4.10.4 and we want to update to 5.4.1.
>
> With solr 4.10.4:
> - we extend PhraseQuery with a custom class in order to remove some
> terms from phrase queries with phrase slop (update of add(Term term, int
> po
Hello,
We are using solr 4.10.4 and we want to update to 5.4.1.
With solr 4.10.4:
- we extend PhraseQuery with a custom class in order to remove some
terms from phrase queries with phrase slop (update of add(Term term, int
position) method)
- in order to use our implementation, we extend Extende
>
>
>
>
> maxGramSize="25"/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I am trying to use dismax query parser (because it seems to have better
> phrase query support compared with standard query parser?)
> I have mm = 1
> ps = 4
>
> I have the fo
I have the following field type:
I am trying to use dismax query parser (because it seems to have better
phrase query support compared with standard query parser?)
I have mm = 1
ps = 4
I have the following data indexed:
1) acute care pharmaceuticals
2) carefusion llc
When
q
Also, the first place to look for answers for questions like
"what is the stemmer doing" is to look at the admin/analysis
page. Each step in the analysis chain will be shown. Hover
over the light gray initials and you'll see the class used
(e.g. WST == WhitespaceTokenizer).
Best,
Erick
On Tue, Ju
Which kind of Highlighter are you using ?
Anyway it is responsibility of your analysis chain.
it is an heavy analysis chain and I can see : "solr.
HunspellStemFilterFactory"
If you are using the term vector for your field, to be used by your
highlighter, in the term vector , for each document, you
For the query "police office" our users are getting back highlighted
results for "police office*r*" (and "police office*rs*") I get why a search
for police officers would include just "office" since the stemmer would
cause that behavior. However I don't understand why "office" is matching
"officer"
Hi Ariya,
I think Hossman specified you that the slop 1 is fine in your use case :)
Of course in the case using span queries was what you were expecting !
Cheers
2015-06-16 10:13 GMT+01:00 ariya bala :
> Ok. Thank you Chris.
> It is a custom Query parser.
> I will check my Query parser on where
Ok. Thank you Chris.
It is a custom Query parser.
I will check my Query parser on where it inject the slop 1.
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Chris Hostetter
wrote:
>
> : I encounter this peculiar case with solr 4.10.2 where the parsed query
> : doesnt seem to be logical.
> :
> : PHRASE23("redu
: I encounter this peculiar case with solr 4.10.2 where the parsed query
: doesnt seem to be logical.
:
: PHRASE23("reduce workforce") ==>
: SpanNearQuery(spanNear([spanNear([Contents:reduceä,
: Contents:workforceä], 1, true)], 23, true))
1) that does not appear to be a parser syntax of any pars
Hi,
I encounter this peculiar case with solr 4.10.2 where the parsed query
doesnt seem to be logical.
PHRASE23("reduce workforce") ==>
SpanNearQuery(spanNear([spanNear([Contents:reduceä,
Contents:workforceä], 1, true)], 23, true))
The question is why does the Phrase("quoted string") gets convert
Hello,
I want to do same like google phrase/spell correction. If anyone
type a query "the dark night" then I need a suggestion like "the dark
knight" in Solr. Is there anyway to do this?
Thanks everyone for all the advice!
To sum up there seems to be no easy solution. I only have the option to
either
- make things really complicated
- only help some users/query structures
- accept the status quo
What could help is an analogon to field aliases:
If it was possible to say
f.title.pf
Hi Michael,
I had to deal such expert users in the past :)
I suggest you to create a new syntax for exact match.
Since he is an expert he will love it.
either suggest
i) ask user to enter number of tokens e.g. q=title:Anatomie AND length:1
or
ii) use dollar sign (or something else) for art
Thanks for the clarification. The issue still remains that you need to
distill all of the competing requirements into a single, concise, and
consistent model, and whether that adequately aligns with existing Solr
features remains problematic.
The general guidance is to stick with the existing Solr
For the title searches, Doug Turnbull wrote a really interesting
in-depth article:
http://opensourceconnections.com/blog/solr/using-solr-cloud-for-robustness-but-returning-json-format/
I don't know if that's the one you read already.
For the fielded query, you get more flexibility if you use multi
Am 11.01.2015 um 18:30 schrieb Jack Krupansky:
> It's still not quite clear to me what your specific goal is. From your
> vague description it seems somewhat different from the blog post that you
> originally cited. So, let's try one more time... explain in plain English
> what use case you are tr
It's still not quite clear to me what your specific goal is. From your
vague description it seems somewhat different from the blog post that you
originally cited. So, let's try one more time... explain in plain English
what use case you are trying to satisfy.
You mention fielded queries, but in my
Hi Ahmet,
> You might find this useful :
> https://lucidworks.com/blog/whats-a-dismax/
I have a basic understanding but will do further reading...
> Regarding your example : title:foo AND author:miller AND year:[2010 TO *]
> last two clauses better served as a filter query.
>
> http://wiki.apa
Hi,
You might find this useful :
https://lucidworks.com/blog/whats-a-dismax/
Regarding your example : title:foo AND author:miller AND year:[2010 TO *]
last two clauses better served as a filter query.
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/CommonQueryParameters#fq
By the way it is possible to combine di
Am 11.01.2015 um 14:19 schrieb Michael Lackhoff:
> Or put another way: How can I do this boost in more complex queries like:
> title:foo AND author:miller AND year:[2010 TO *]
> It would be nice to have a title "foo" before another title "some foo
> and bar" (given the other criteria also match bo
Am 11.01.2015 um 14:01 schrieb Ahmet Arslan:
> What happens when you do not use fielded query?
>
> q=anatomie&qf=title_exact
> instead of
>
> q=title_exact:"anatomie"
Then it works (with qf=title):
+(title:anatomie) (title_exact:" anatomie "^20.0)
Only problem is that my frontend alway
What happens when you do not use fielded query?
q=anatomie&qf=title_exact
instead of
q=title_exact:"anatomie"
Ahmet
On Sunday, January 11, 2015 12:05 PM, Michael Lackhoff
wrote:
My aim is to boost "exactish" matches similar to the recipe described in
[1]. The anchoring works in q but not in
My aim is to boost "exactish" matches similar to the recipe described in
[1]. The anchoring works in q but not in pf, where I need it. Here is an
example that shows the effect:
q=title_exact:"anatomie"&pf=title_exact^2000
debugQuery says it is interpreted this way:
+title_exact:" anatomie "
On top of what Shawn rightly said, two things:
1. Try to benchmark yourself (best bet) solution with and without the
shingles. Then you know better and have story with numbers to tell.
2. If you go with the shingles approach, consider removing duplicates with
https://wiki.apache.org/solr/Analyzers
On 10/27/2014 6:20 AM, Robust Links wrote:
> 1) we want to index and search all tokens in a document (i.e. we do not
> rely on external stores)
>
> 2) we need search time to be fast and willing to pay larger indexing time
> and index size,
>
> 3) be able to search as fast as possible ngrams of 3
Hi
We are trying to upgrade our index from 3.6.1 to 4.9.1 and I wanted to make
sure our existing indexing strategy is still valid or not. The statistics
of the raw corpus are:
- 4.8 Billon total number of tokens in the entire corpus.
- 13MM documents
We have 3 requirements
1) we want to inde
Hi
We are trying to upgrade our index from 3.6.1 to 4.9.1 and I wanted to make
sure our existing indexing strategy is still valid or not. The statistics
of the raw corpus are:
- 4.8 Billon total number of tokens in the entire corpus.
- 13MM documents
We have 3 requirements
1) we want to inde
Hi Ankur,
For the leading wildcard you may want to try the
ReversedWildcardFilterFactory:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Filter+Descriptions#FilterDescriptions-ReversedWildcardFilter
in the code of CPQ there is a loop over filters of your text field and a
specific check:
Hi,
I am using Solr 4.2.1. I have a couple of questions regarding using leading and
trailing wildcards with phrase queries and doing positional ordering.
* I have a field called text which is defined as the text_general field.
I downloaded the ComplexPhraseQuery plugin
(https://issues.ap
Michael
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Phrase-query-combined-with-term-query-for-maximum-accuracy-tp4098215p4098599.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
or
title:(blue hat)^30 or text:(blue
hat)^10&fq=active:true&start=0&rows=40&sort=score+desc&fl=*,score&country=US
for collection_DE it works fine with both lowercase and uppercase operators
-
Thanks,
Michael
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3
You need some parentheses:
title:john doe^30 OR description:john doe^10
should be:
title:(john doe)^30 OR description:(john doe)^10
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: michael.boom
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 7:20 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Phrase query
ing edismax parser:
q.op=or&q=title:"john doe"^100 OR description:"john doe"^50 OR title:john
doe^30 OR description:john doe^10
Would the above query provide me what i want, or is there a better way to do
it?
Thanks!
-----
Thanks,
Michael
--
View this message in conte
Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: SolrLover
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 5:53 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Is it possible to use phrase query in range queries?
I am trying to use range queries to take advantage of having constant scores
in multivalued field but I am not sur
I am trying to use range queries to take advantage of having constant scores
in multivalued field but I am not sure if range queries support phrase
query..
Ex:
The below range query works fine.
_query_:"address:([Charlotte TO Charlotte])"^5.5
The below query doesn't work,
_
: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 9:16 PM
Subject: Phrase query with prefix query
Is there a query parser that supports a phrase query with prefix query
at the end, such as "San Fran*" ?
--
-
T. "Kuro" Kurosa
Or shingles, presuming you want to tokenize and output unigrams.
On Aug 2, 2013, at 11:33 AM, Walter Underwood wrote:
> Search against a field using edge N-grams. --wunder
>
> On Aug 2, 2013, at 11:16 AM, T. Kuro Kurosaka wrote:
>
>> Is there a query parser that supports a
Search against a field using edge N-grams. --wunder
On Aug 2, 2013, at 11:16 AM, T. Kuro Kurosaka wrote:
> Is there a query parser that supports a phrase query with prefix query at the
> end, such as "San Fran*" ?
>
> --
> -
Is there a query parser that supports a phrase query with prefix query
at the end, such as "San Fran*" ?
--
-
T. "Kuro" Kurosaka • Senior Software Engineer
Hi
I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4362 for this.
Ahmet
--- On Sun, 1/20/13, Ahmet Arslan wrote:
> From: Ahmet Arslan
> Subject: edismax, phrase query with slop, pf parameter
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Date: Sunday, January 20, 2013, 6:13 PM
> He
> But I wonder what "text_ws" means?
it means text whitespace you can find its definition in schema.xml. search for
'text_ws' It uses whitespacetokenizer.
Thanks, it worked after editing my schema line to:
But I wonder what "text_ws" means?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Keep-Punctuation-in-Parsed-Phrase-Query-tp4008977p4008984.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> I am working with apache-solr-3.6.0 on windows machine. I
> would like to
> search for phrases which contain punctuation marks.
> Example:
>
> "He said: Hi"
> I tried to escape the punctuation marks using \ so my url
> was:
>
> http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q="He%20said\:%20Hi"&version=2.2
uery a phrase without trimming the punctuation marks?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-Keep-Punctuation-in-Parsed-Phrase-Query-tp4008977.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
itle:"blue
tooth"^5.0 | bestMatchTitle:blue tooth^20.0)~0.01)
But I still need the query on the individual tokens, otherwise it
eliminates results that may be good hits. So far, any way I have tried
to combine the two queries either opens up matching a ton of documents
t
: Is this the intended behavior of edismax, or am I missing anything ?
it definitely looks like a bug to me, that pf clause is non sensical.
I've opened a jira to track this, but i'm afraid i can't offer any advice
on how to fix it...
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3008
-Hoss
Hi, I am new to edismax, and trying to migrate from dismax to edismax. For
the queries with
the explicitly quoted sub phrase query, it seems edismax will ignore the
quoted one, compared with
dismax during the whole query phrase matching process (pf). Here is one
example:
For the same query: 2012
I think you can use pf2 and pf3 in your requestHandler.
Best regards,
Elisabeth
2011/10/16 Vijay Ramachandran
> Hello. I have an application where I try to match longer queries
> (sentences)
> to short documents (search phrases). Typically, the documents are 3-5 terms
> in length. I am facing a
1 - 100 of 231 matches
Mail list logo
