Re: Searching for future or "null" dates
On 26.09.2008 06:17 Chris Hostetter wrote: > that's true, regretably there is no prefix operator to indicate a "SHOULD" > clause in the Lucene query langauge, so if you set the default op to "AND" > you can't then override it on individual clauses. > > this is one of hte reasons i never make the default op AND. Just for symmetry or to get rid of this restriction wouldn't it be a good idea to add such a prefix operator? > i'm sure your food will still taste pretty good :) That's what my wife keeps telling me ;-) Many thanks. I think I will leave it as is for the current application but use OR-Default plus prefix operators for new projects. -Michael
Re: Searching for future or "null" dates
: I would also like to follow your advice but don't know how to do it with : defaultOperator="AND". What I am missing is the equivalent to OR: : AND: + : NOT: - : OR: ??? : I didn't find anything on the Solr or Lucene query syntax pages. If that's true, regretably there is no prefix operator to indicate a "SHOULD" clause in the Lucene query langauge, so if you set the default op to "AND" you can't then override it on individual clauses. this is one of hte reasons i never make the default op AND. If i'm dealing with structured queries generated progromaticly or by "advanced" users (ie: people who know they are querying Solr) i leave the default op alone an let them specify the full syntax with total control. if i'm dealing with "novice" users who just want to search for stuff i use dismax with it's shinny sexy "mm" param (disclaimer: i wrote it) and the default op doesn't matter (even if i want to make every term a user types mandatory) : I switched to the AND-default because that is the default in my web : frontend so I don't have to change logic. What should I do in this : situation? Go back to the OR-default? it depends on what exactly your goals are ... you could always leave the defualt OR in the schema but have your front end send q.op when needed -- or set q.op as a default in a handler only used by your front end while other queries use handlers without it (and get the default behavior) ... ...or you could just ignore the ramblings of a crazy person like me who thinks AND and OR are abominations in a non-boolean logic system since they make sense for you and go about your day. i'm sure your food will still taste pretty good :) -Hoss
Re: Searching for future or "null" dates
On 23.09.2008 00:30 Chris Hostetter wrote: > : Here is what I was able to get working with your help. > : > : (productId:(102685804)) AND liveDate:[* TO NOW] AND ((endDate:[NOW TO *]) OR > : ((*:* -endDate:[* TO *]))) > : > : the *:* is what I was missing. > > Please, PLEASE ... do yourself a favor and stop using "AND" and "OR" ... > food will taste better, flowers will smell fresher, and the world will be > a happy shinny place... > > +productId:102685804 +liveDate:[* TO NOW] +(endDate:[NOW TO *] (*:* > -endDate:[* TO *])) I would also like to follow your advice but don't know how to do it with defaultOperator="AND". What I am missing is the equivalent to OR: AND: + NOT: - OR: ??? I didn't find anything on the Solr or Lucene query syntax pages. If there is such an equivalent then I guess the query would become: productId:102685804 liveDate:[* TO NOW] (endDate:[NOW TO *] (*:* -endDate:[* TO *])) I switched to the AND-default because that is the default in my web frontend so I don't have to change logic. What should I do in this situation? Go back to the OR-default? It is not so much this example I am after but I have a syntax translater in my application that must be able to handle similar expressions and I want to keep it simple and still have tasty food ;-) -Michael
RE: Searching for future or "null" dates
Thanks I'll try it out. hossman wrote: > > > : Here is what I was able to get working with your help. > : > : (productId:(102685804)) AND liveDate:[* TO NOW] AND ((endDate:[NOW TO > *]) OR > : ((*:* -endDate:[* TO *]))) > : > : the *:* is what I was missing. > > Please, PLEASE ... do yourself a favor and stop using "AND" and "OR" ... > food will taste better, flowers will smell fresher, and the world will be > a happy shinny place... > > +productId:102685804 +liveDate:[* TO NOW] +(endDate:[NOW TO *] (*:* > -endDate:[* TO *])) > > > > -Hoss > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Searching-for-future-or-%22null%22-dates-tp19502167p19621485.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
RE: Searching for future or "null" dates
: Here is what I was able to get working with your help. : : (productId:(102685804)) AND liveDate:[* TO NOW] AND ((endDate:[NOW TO *]) OR : ((*:* -endDate:[* TO *]))) : : the *:* is what I was missing. Please, PLEASE ... do yourself a favor and stop using "AND" and "OR" ... food will taste better, flowers will smell fresher, and the world will be a happy shinny place... +productId:102685804 +liveDate:[* TO NOW] +(endDate:[NOW TO *] (*:* -endDate:[* TO *])) -Hoss
RE: Searching for future or "null" dates
Here is what I was able to get working with your help. (productId:(102685804)) AND liveDate:[* TO NOW] AND ((endDate:[NOW TO *]) OR ((*:* -endDate:[* TO *]))) the *:* is what I was missing. Thanks for your help. hossman wrote: > > > : If the query stars with a negative clause Lucene returns nothing. > > that's not true. If a "Query" in lucene is a BooleanQuery that only > contains negative clauses, then Lucene returns nothing (because nothing is > positively selected) ... but it if there is a mix of negative lcauses and > positive clauses doesn't matter what order the clauses are in. > > in *solr* there is code that attempts to detect a query containing purely > negative clauses and it adds a "MatchAllDocs" query in that case -- but it > only works at the top level of a query. nested queries like this... > > +fieldA:foo +(-fieldB:bar -fieldC:baz) > > ...won't work as you expect, because that nested query is only negative > clauses. you can add your own MatchAllDocs query explicitly using the *:* > syntax > > +fieldA:foo +(*:* -fieldB:bar -fieldC:baz) > > : endDate[NOW TO *] OR -endDate:[* TO *] > > side note: you really, REALLY don't wnat to mix the "+/-" syntax with > "ANT/OR/NOT" .. it almost never works out the way you expect... > > : >can I search for a date, which is either in the future OR missing > : >completely (meaning open ended) > : > > : >I've tried -endDate:[* TO *] OR endDate[NOW TO *] but that doesn't > work. > > unless you've set the default op to "AND" this should work... > > fq = endDate:[NOW TO *] (*:* -endDate:[* TO *]) > > > -Hoss > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Searching-for-future-or-%22null%22-dates-tp19502167p19563117.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: AW: Searching for future or "null" dates
Yes your right I mistyped when I said [* : *]. I did mean [* TO *] hossman wrote: > > > : present and have a end date in the present/future or none at all. I had > : looked into searching for null dates and had come across the -date[* : > *] > : syntax, which searches for the absence of the index value for the field > : specified. > > to clarify: that isn't valid syntax. i think you are confusing two > things... > > 1) has a value in field "foo": foo:[* TO *] > 2) match all docs: *:* > > > -Hoss > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Searching-for-future-or-%22null%22-dates-tp19502167p19519922.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: AW: Searching for future or "null" dates
: present and have a end date in the present/future or none at all. I had : looked into searching for null dates and had come across the -date[* : *] : syntax, which searches for the absence of the index value for the field : specified. to clarify: that isn't valid syntax. i think you are confusing two things... 1) has a value in field "foo": foo:[* TO *] 2) match all docs: *:* -Hoss
RE: Searching for future or "null" dates
: If the query stars with a negative clause Lucene returns nothing. that's not true. If a "Query" in lucene is a BooleanQuery that only contains negative clauses, then Lucene returns nothing (because nothing is positively selected) ... but it if there is a mix of negative lcauses and positive clauses doesn't matter what order the clauses are in. in *solr* there is code that attempts to detect a query containing purely negative clauses and it adds a "MatchAllDocs" query in that case -- but it only works at the top level of a query. nested queries like this... +fieldA:foo +(-fieldB:bar -fieldC:baz) ...won't work as you expect, because that nested query is only negative clauses. you can add your own MatchAllDocs query explicitly using the *:* syntax +fieldA:foo +(*:* -fieldB:bar -fieldC:baz) : endDate[NOW TO *] OR -endDate:[* TO *] side note: you really, REALLY don't wnat to mix the "+/-" syntax with "ANT/OR/NOT" .. it almost never works out the way you expect... : >can I search for a date, which is either in the future OR missing : >completely (meaning open ended) : > : >I've tried -endDate:[* TO *] OR endDate[NOW TO *] but that doesn't work. unless you've set the default op to "AND" this should work... fq = endDate:[NOW TO *] (*:* -endDate:[* TO *]) -Hoss
RE: Searching for future or "null" dates
If the query stars with a negative clause Lucene returns nothing. endDate[NOW TO *] OR -endDate:[* TO *] Might work -Original Message- From: Kolodziej Christian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 12:01 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: AW: Searching for future or "null" dates Hi Chris, >I'm having a lot of trouble getting this query syntax to work correctly. >How >can I search for a date, which is either in the future OR missing >completely (meaning open ended) > >I've tried -endDate:[* TO *] OR endDate[NOW TO *] but that doesn't work. >Adding parentheses doesn't help either. Why do you use a range query for the endDate, that is not set? It's not tested yet but try -endDate:19700101T00:00:00Z (if it's a date field) or -date:0 (if you have saved timestamp). Another solution I would try is to use specific dates instead of NOW or * for the future. Can you post the results of your trials, this might be interesting for other users, too. Best regards, Christian
Re: AW: Searching for future or "null" dates
Christian Kolodziej wrote: > > Hi Chris, > >>I'm having a lot of trouble getting this query syntax to work correctly. >>How >>can I search for a date, which is either in the future OR missing >>completely >>(meaning open ended) >> >>I've tried -endDate:[* TO *] OR endDate[NOW TO *] but that doesn't work. >>Adding parentheses doesn't help either. > > Why do you use a range query for the endDate, that is not set? It's not > tested yet but try -endDate:19700101T00:00:00Z (if it's a date field) or > -date:0 (if you have saved timestamp). Another solution I would try is to > use specific dates instead of NOW or * for the future. > > Can you post the results of your trials, this might be interesting for > other users, too. > > Best regards, > Christian > > > Sorry, I think I over simplified my example, let me clarify my reasoning. I'm searching for products that have a start date in the past up to the present and have a end date in the present/future or none at all. I had looked into searching for null dates and had come across the -date[* : *] syntax, which searches for the absence of the index value for the field specified. Example: ( I thought this one would work) product:foo AND startDate:[* TO NOW] AND (endDate:[NOW TO *] OR -endDate[* : *]) I've gotten the syntax below to work but it seems overkill and redundant ((product:foo AND startDate:[* TO NOW] AND endDate:[NOW TO *]) OR (product:foo AND startDate:[* TO NOW] AND (-endDate:[* TO *]))) Again I'm simplifying the actual query syntax for this example, but it seems having to restate the product and startDate again in the query is overkill. I thought their might be an easier way. Thanks for your example. I'll try it out and post back. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Searching-for-future-or-%22null%22-dates-tp19502167p19515122.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
AW: Searching for future or "null" dates
Hi Chris, >I'm having a lot of trouble getting this query syntax to work correctly. >How >can I search for a date, which is either in the future OR missing >completely >(meaning open ended) > >I've tried -endDate:[* TO *] OR endDate[NOW TO *] but that doesn't work. >Adding parentheses doesn't help either. Why do you use a range query for the endDate, that is not set? It's not tested yet but try -endDate:19700101T00:00:00Z (if it's a date field) or -date:0 (if you have saved timestamp). Another solution I would try is to use specific dates instead of NOW or * for the future. Can you post the results of your trials, this might be interesting for other users, too. Best regards, Christian
Searching for future or "null" dates
I'm having a lot of trouble getting this query syntax to work correctly. How can I search for a date, which is either in the future OR missing completely (meaning open ended) I've tried -endDate:[* TO *] OR endDate[NOW TO *] but that doesn't work. Adding parentheses doesn't help either. Any help would be appreciated. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Searching-for-future-or-%22null%22-dates-tp19502167p19502167.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
