Re: Facet Query Question
My actual:
INFO: [] webapp=null path=/select
params={timeAllowed=3&qt=dismax&q=columbia&rows=1&facet.field={!ex%3Dcat}categories&facet.field={!ex%3Dadv}adventures&facet=true&facet.limit=-1&facet.mincount=1&fq={!tag%3Dcat}categories:Boots&fq={!tag%3Dadv}adventures:Camping}
hits=1 status=0 QTime=1
On Feb 27, 2011, at 5:48 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Tim Christensen
> wrote:
>> q=query&fq={!ex=cat}categories:Jackets&fq={!ex=adv}adventures:Camping&facet.field={!tag=cat}categories&facet.field={!tag=adv}adventures
>
> If this is the actual command you used, it looks like you switched
> "ex" and "tag"?
>
> -Yonik
> http://lucidimagination.com
-
Tim Christensen
Director Media & Technology
Vann's Inc.
406-203-4656
http://www.vanns.com
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/tim_christensen
t...@vanns.com
Follow Vann's on Twitter: http://twitter.com/vanns
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. This
communication may contain material protected by the attorney-client privilege.
If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering
the e-mail to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this
e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or
copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please immediately notify Tim Christensen by telephone at
406-203-4656. You will be reimbursed for reasonable costs incurred in notifying
us.
Re: Facet Query Question
Sorry. It was hand typed, it is the other way around. It is part of the actual,
but I did not copy and paste it.
q=query&fq={!tag=cat}categories:Jackets&fq={!tag=adv}adventures:Camping&facet.field={!ex=cat}categories&facet.field={!ex=adv}adventures
On Feb 27, 2011, at 5:48 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Tim Christensen
> wrote:
>> q=query&fq={!ex=cat}categories:Jackets&fq={!ex=adv}adventures:Camping&facet.field={!tag=cat}categories&facet.field={!tag=adv}adventures
>
> If this is the actual command you used, it looks like you switched
> "ex" and "tag"?
>
> -Yonik
> http://lucidimagination.com
Re: Facet Query Question
Okay -- so I did see that before and I tested it. It does work for example when
I do this:
q=query&fq={!ex=cat}categories:Jackets&facet.field={!tag=cat}categories
Thank you for that part. What I don't get is any of the other facet fields
returning their full list of values. So in my case I need all the facets to
bring back all their options.
It seems that only if I query on a field with the tag and ex filters it works
for that set of facets. So in my previous example if I queried facet 1 and
refined facet 2 by default, but still want all of facet 2.
When I do this one (there is more to this, this is just to abbreviate the
example):
q=query&fq={!ex=cat}categories:Jackets&fq={!ex=adv}adventures:Camping&facet.field={!tag=cat}categories&facet.field={!tag=adv}adventures
It does a refine so that the facets for categories and the facets for
adventures go back to being restrained.
If this is solved, my next problem is how to do the multi-select query so that
if I did have all of categories or adventures returning like I want, when two
or more of each are selected, what does the filter query look like?
Thank you, I am amazed at this list and the responsiveness.
Tim
On Feb 27, 2011, at 4:55 PM, Jan Høydahl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> LocalParam {!tag} and {!ex} will help you:
> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SimpleFacetParameters#Tagging_and_excluding_Filters
>
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>
> On 28. feb. 2011, at 00.41, Tim Christensen wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am trying to do the following:
>>
>> Where a query might return:
>>
>> Facet 1
>> A
>> B
>> C
>>
>> Facet 2
>> X
>> Y
>> Z
>>
>> User selects Facet 1 option A. Normally this paradigm would contract the
>> results as in a refining paradigm. That would be fine and the obvious UI
>> change. But by doing so, Facet 2 option X is no longer available -- again
>> because of the refining. Let's say I still wanted Facet 2 option X to be
>> available to instead of refining, expands the results.
>>
>> Normally, my query might look like:
>>
>> q=query&fq=Facet 1:A (for the first part of my question. What I have done is
>> return two sets of facet results, one for the main query and one for the
>> refined query. That way I can still offer option X. What I don't know how to
>> do is query beyond that. I have tried some ORs and ANDs in my unit tests,
>> but don't think this is the right way.
>>
>> My question is whether there is a way in a single query to bring back all
>> the original facets regardless of any facet refining. If not, give that I
>> return two sets of facets - a refined set and the 'original' querys' facet
>> set, how would I fashion this query?
>>
>> My apologies if this is rookie, I have a few years of Solr under my belt,
>> but can't think outside the refining and then expanding the result set with
>> a facet query that was available in the original query results.
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Tim Christensen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Facet Query Question
Hi, I am trying to do the following: Where a query might return: Facet 1 A B C Facet 2 X Y Z User selects Facet 1 option A. Normally this paradigm would contract the results as in a refining paradigm. That would be fine and the obvious UI change. But by doing so, Facet 2 option X is no longer available -- again because of the refining. Let's say I still wanted Facet 2 option X to be available to instead of refining, expands the results. Normally, my query might look like: q=query&fq=Facet 1:A (for the first part of my question. What I have done is return two sets of facet results, one for the main query and one for the refined query. That way I can still offer option X. What I don't know how to do is query beyond that. I have tried some ORs and ANDs in my unit tests, but don't think this is the right way. My question is whether there is a way in a single query to bring back all the original facets regardless of any facet refining. If not, give that I return two sets of facets - a refined set and the 'original' querys' facet set, how would I fashion this query? My apologies if this is rookie, I have a few years of Solr under my belt, but can't think outside the refining and then expanding the result set with a facet query that was available in the original query results. Thank you, Tim Christensen
Solr Cache
We have two servers, with the same index load balanced. The indexes are updated at the same time every day. Occasionally, a search on one server will return different results from the other server, even though the data used to create the index is exactly the same. Is this possibly due to caching? Does the cache reset automatically after the commit? The problem usually resolves itself - by all appearances, randomly, but I assume something I don't know is going on such as a new searcher starting up for example at some point in the day. All cache settings are the solrconfig defaults. Thank you ahead of time. ---- Tim Christensen Director Media & Technology Vann's Inc. 406-203-4656 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vanns.com
Feedback Wanted
We launched our Solr powered search a few weeks ago and have finished up most of the tweaking. Would love feedback from the collective wisdom of this crowd if anyone is willing. Visit our site at http://www.vanns.com and use the search box at the top of the page. Also, for those who have a desire to think a bit different on how to integrate search context into other perspectives, we used cxf to create a web service on top of our Solr search and expose More Like This items in our item pages. You can see this by hitting any item page. It works very well with core products like digital cameras for example, we have work to do with some types of accessories. A good example of an item page with suggested items powered by Solr: http://www.vanns.com/shop/servlet/item/features/405232620 Let me know what you think and if you can inspire us to improve or adapt more ideas to our site. Solr rocks! Thank you to all the contributors -- owning our site search has been a dream of mine for 8 years. Tim Christensen Vann's Inc http://www.vanns.com
Re: Unlock on startup
We just dealt with this same exact problem on our servers and I am positive our last sync with 1.3 was after the 12th. We had to delete and rebuild both our indexes on our servers today in fact. If it is fixed, it does not work for us either. - Tim Christensen Vanns Inc. http://www.vanns.com On Aug 6, 2008, at 6:46 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: What date did you get 1.3-dev? I committed a patch for this on Jul 12th. -Yonik On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 1:38 PM, sundar shankar <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Hi All, I am having to test solr indexing quite a bit on my local and dev environments. I had the true. But restarting my server still doesn't seem to remove the writelock file. Is there some other configuration that I might have to do get this fixed. My Configurations : Solr 1.3 on Windows xp(local) and RHL on dev box. Jboss 4.05 Regards Sundar _ Searching for the best deals on travel? Visit MSN Travel. http://msn.coxandkings.co.in/cnk/cnk.do
Re: Newbie Q: searching multiple fields
Jon, As a nearly ex-newbie you are experiencing some similar things I did. If you are using the default set-up of Solr, make sure in your schema.xml you are indexing the fields you want to search, at least for now, as text fields. One way you can scale this easily for example if your schema defines a field as a string - and this is one of the ones not searchable, do this: So perhaps your schema looks like this now: Make sure at least your indexed=true on fields you want to search. However if you want name to be searched, you can either: stored="false" multiValued="true"/> Make your search just on the default_search_field using dismax for example. OR what I did (sort of): (Note the false on indexed) (Note the true on indexed) stored="false"/> (The text versions are for boosting purposes only - not for display) stored="false" multiValued="true"/> (Note the false on stored - you do not need this stored) (I still copy the fields into a main search block of text) explicit default_search_field^0.5 name_text^2.0 description_text^1.5 .. Ultimately, I would recommend you use the dynamic fields perspective - it makes for a much cleaner schema and config and is easier to scale. Tim On Jun 2, 2008, at 11:53 AM, Jon Drukman wrote: I am brand new to Solr. I am trying to get a very simple setup running. I've got just a few fields: name, description, tags. I am only able to search on the default field (name) however. I tried to set up the dismax config to search all the fields, but I never get any results on the other fields. Example doc: 318 Testing the new system Here is the very descriptive description jsd 2008-05-16T05:05:10Z q=system finds this doc. q=descriptive does not. q=descriptive&qt=dismax does not q=descriptive&qt=dismax&qf=description does not my solrconfig contains: explicit 0.01 name^2 description^1.5 tags^0.8 name^2 description^2 tags^1 100 *:* What am I missing? -jsd- - Tim Christensen Director Media & Technology Vann's Inc. 406-203-4656 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vanns.com
Re: Relevancy Issue - How do I make it work?
Yonik, Thank you for the response. You are correct, regular (non-accessory) products are boosted '2.0' at index time. However both items the non ipod item and the ipod would have received the initial boost on the same fields since they are both non-accessory items. Is your comment still relevant in that context? Tim On May 29, 2008, at 7:30 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: field norms of un-boosted fields are normally less than 1 (it's a factor that weights larger fields less). The index-time boost is also multiplied into this factor though. Given that your first doc had a huge norm, it looks like the document or field was boosted at index time? -Yonik On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 9:22 PM, Tim Christensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, This is my first post. I have been working with Lucene for about 4 weeks and Solr for just about 10 days. We are going to convert our site search over to Solr as soon as we figure out some of the nuances. As I was testing out the synonyms features to decide how we could best use it, I searched for iPod (I know it is an example, but we actually sell them). I was shocked when the search results were nothing close to an iPod. Looking closer, I could see that the description had an iPod word in it, just 1. With debug on, that fact is confirmed (this is the first result): 152529.23 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(search_text:ipod in 6247), product of: 1.0 = tf(termFreq(search_text:ipod)=1) 3.7238584 = idf(docFreq=522) 40960.0 = fieldNorm(field=search_text, doc=6247) Here is an explainOther, FOR an actual iPod SKU (in the same search): id:650085488 1.0473351 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(search_text:ipod in 6985), product of: 3.0 = tf(termFreq(search_text:ipod)=9) 3.7238584 = idf(docFreq=522) 0.09375 = fieldNorm(field=search_text, doc=6985) If the term frequency is higher, the only difference is'fieldNorm' which I do not understand in the context of relevancy. Does this have to do with omitNorms in some way? In a related factor, I also tried the dismax query with the following line in it: search_text^0.5 brand^10.0 keywords^5.0 title^20.0 sub_title^1.5 model^2.0 attribute^1.1 As an experiment I boosted the title a bunch, since this is where the term iPod exists the most. It made no effect, in fact, it was not even working. The title was not being used at all, just the search_text, even though I have it indexed. Here is the relevant schema parts stored="false" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> search_text Thanks to all who are willing to take a look at this and help. Tim Christensen Director Media & Technology Vann's Inc. 406-203-4656 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vanns.com Tim Christensen Director Media & Technology Vann's Inc. 406-203-4656 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vanns.com
Relevancy Issue - How do I make it work?
Hi, This is my first post. I have been working with Lucene for about 4 weeks and Solr for just about 10 days. We are going to convert our site search over to Solr as soon as we figure out some of the nuances. As I was testing out the synonyms features to decide how we could best use it, I searched for iPod (I know it is an example, but we actually sell them). I was shocked when the search results were nothing close to an iPod. Looking closer, I could see that the description had an iPod word in it, just 1. With debug on, that fact is confirmed (this is the first result): 152529.23 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(search_text:ipod in 6247), product of: 1.0 = tf(termFreq(search_text:ipod)=1) 3.7238584 = idf(docFreq=522) 40960.0 = fieldNorm(field=search_text, doc=6247) Here is an explainOther, FOR an actual iPod SKU (in the same search): id:650085488 1.0473351 = (MATCH) fieldWeight(search_text:ipod in 6985), product of: 3.0 = tf(termFreq(search_text:ipod)=9) 3.7238584 = idf(docFreq=522) 0.09375 = fieldNorm(field=search_text, doc=6985) If the term frequency is higher, the only difference is'fieldNorm' which I do not understand in the context of relevancy. Does this have to do with omitNorms in some way? In a related factor, I also tried the dismax query with the following line in it: search_text^0.5 brand^10.0 keywords^5.0 title^20.0 sub_title^1.5 model^2.0 attribute^1.1 As an experiment I boosted the title a bunch, since this is where the term iPod exists the most. It made no effect, in fact, it was not even working. The title was not being used at all, just the search_text, even though I have it indexed. Here is the relevant schema parts required="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="false" /> stored="true" /> multiValued="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> indexed="false" stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="true" /> stored="false" multiValued="true" termVectors="true"/> search_text Thanks to all who are willing to take a look at this and help. Tim Christensen Director Media & Technology Vann's Inc. 406-203-4656 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.vanns.com
