Hi,
I am doing a search on my index for a query like this:
query = "\"Term 1\" \"Term 2\" \"Term 3\""
Where I want to find Term 1, Term 2 and Term 3 in the index. However, I
only want to search for "Term 3" if I find "Term 1" and "Term 2" first, to
avoid doing processing on hits that only contai
What do you mean by "first"? Would you want to process a doc thatdid NOT
have a "Term 3"?
Let's say you have the following:
doc1: "Term 1"
doc2: "Term 2"
doc3: "Term 1" "Term 2"
doc4: "Term 3"
doc5: "Term 1" "Term 2" "Term 3"
doc6: "Term 2" "Term 3"
Which docs do you want to get from your search?
Erm.. I have to be missing something here, wouldn't you be able just do
the following:
do a search on "Term 1" AND "Term 2"
do a search on "Term 2" AND "Term2" AND "Term 3"
This would ensure that you have two objects back, one of which is
guaranteed to be a subset of the other.
Then, when yo
> What do you mean by "first"? Would you want to process a doc thatdid NOT
> have a "Term 3"?
>
> Let's say you have the following:
> doc1: "Term 1"
> doc2: "Term 2"
> doc3: "Term 1" "Term 2"
> doc4: "Term 3"
> doc5: "Term 1" "Term 2" "Term 3"
> doc6: "Term 2" "Term 3"
>
> Which docs do you want to
> do a search on "Term 1" AND "Term 2"
> do a search on "Term 2" AND "Term2" AND "Term 3"
>
> This would ensure that you have two objects back, one of which is
> guaranteed to be a subset of the other.
I did start doing this after sending the email. My only concern is search
speed. Right now I
Looking at what you wrote:
I am doing a weighting system where I rank documents that have Term 1 AND
Term 2 AND Term 3 more highly than documents that have just Term 1 AND Term
2, and more highly than documents that just have Term 1 OR Term 2 but not
both.
Couldn't you maybe get the same effect
> Couldn't you maybe get the same effect using some clever term boosting?
>
> I.. think something like
>
> "Term 1" OR "Term 2" OR "Term 3" ^ .25
>
> would return in almost the exact order that you are asking for here, with
> the only real difference being that you would have some matches for only
[I originally posted this to the Lucene.net mailing list,but it was
suggested that I might have more luck here]
I am trying to get a particular search to work and it is proving
problematic. The actual source data is quite complex but can be
summarised by the following example:
I have arti
Assuming i understand you correctly, then...
1. properties only exist as part of a single article (no articles share
a complex property)
2. you don't have any need to ever return searchese on
properties, they exist just to add in searching for articles.
IF that's correct, then the idea i w
