Ditto Jack on ComplexPhraseQueryParser.
See also: https://issues.apache.org/jira/i#browse/LUCENE-5205
-Original Message-
From: Jack Krupansky [mailto:j...@basetechnology.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2014 6:59 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Wildcard searches
Take
for ComplexPhraseQueryParser that you may be aware of? I am looking for
some examples. Thanks!
Regards,
Raghu
-Original Message-
From: Allison, Timothy B. [mailto:talli...@mitre.org]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 8:02 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Wildcard searches
Ditto Jack
Message-
From: raghavendra.k@barclays.com [mailto:raghavendra.k@barclays.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 11:49 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Wildcard searches
Thank you, Tim.
I have read that ComplexPhraseQueryParser has issues while searching in more
than one
@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Wildcard searches
Sorry, you're right. I'm not sure that it analyzes multiterm components,
either. The Surround query parser also has similar limitations.
Best bet might be to compile:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/i#browse/LUCENE-5205 or
https://issues.apache.org/jira
]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 5:19 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Wildcard searches
Sorry, but I don't know what exactly you mean by compile from these locations.
Do you mean I could download and customize the code?
Regards,
Raghu
-Original Message-
From: Allison
Hi,
Can Lucene support wildcard searches such as the ones shown below?
Indexed value is XYZ CORPORATION LIMITED.
XYZ CORPORATION LIMI*
XYZ CORPORATION *MIT*
XYZ *PORAT* LIMI*
*YZ CORPO* LIMITE*
In other words, the flexibility for the user to provide a wild card at any
position, in a situation
: raghavendra.k@barclays.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 6:30 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Wildcard searches
Hi,
Can Lucene support wildcard searches such as the ones shown below?
Indexed value is XYZ CORPORATION LIMITED.
XYZ CORPORATION LIMI*
XYZ CORPORATION *MIT*
XYZ *PORAT
On 2/5/2014 6:30 PM, raghavendra.k@barclays.com wrote:
Hi,
Can Lucene support wildcard searches such as the ones shown below?
Indexed value is XYZ CORPORATION LIMITED.
If you index the value as a single token (KeywordTokenizer), there is
nothing really special about the examples you gave
in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/PorterStemFilter-causes-wildcard-searches-to-not-work-tp3525790p3544411.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user
analyser,
wildcard searches malfunction.
As an example, I have the words appendicitis and sensitisation
in our content. When I enter a query of a*itis I would expect
to have appendicitis match but instead I get sensitisation and
not appendicitis. If I remove the PorterStemFilter then things
analyser,
wildcard searches malfunction.
As an example, I have the words appendicitis and sensitisation
in our content. When I enter a query of a*itis I would expect
to have appendicitis match but instead I get sensitisation and
not appendicitis. If I remove the PorterStemFilter then things
:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/PorterStemFilter-causes-wildcard-searches-to-not-work-tp3525790p3544411.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
: Wildcard searches
Ted im using SOLR, but I cant figure out what type of fieldtype I should
use to get a query like this to work:
q=useragents: abcdefghijklm
where I have in my index one document with value abc in field
useragents
That query results in 0 hits.
If I issue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossposting
-Original Message-
From: Niclas Rothman [mailto:n...@lechill.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 12:12 AM
To: gene...@lucene.apache.org
Cc: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Wildcard searches
Hi Fuad and thanks for your reply
-Original Message-
From: Niclas Rothman [mailto:n...@lechill.com]
Sent: February-05-10 6:12 PM
To: gene...@lucene.apache.org
Cc: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Wildcard searches
Hi Fuad and thanks for your reply!
The first post I know now was a wrong approach, I
hard
coding...)
-Original Message-
From: Ted Dunning [mailto:ted.dunn...@gmail.com]
Sent: February-05-10 6:45 PM
To: gene...@lucene.apache.org
Cc: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Wildcard searches
Fuad,
I think that you took Niclas requirements backwards. He
score method?
Tor Atle
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Wildcard-searches-and-document-boost-tp26857120p26864799.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e
: Wildcard searches and document boost
You need to change multiTermRewriteMethod of QueryParser.
qp.setMultiTermRewriteMethod(MultiTermQuery.SCORING_BOOLEAN_QUERY_REWRITE)
;
Thanks. So the normal way of doing this is setting the rewrite method to
scoring, and if BooleanQuery.TooManyClauses
1.0.
Luke says my query has been rewritten to ConstantScore(myField:wash*), so
that sort of explains what's going on. But why? And short of sorting the
result, what is the solution to my problem?
Best regards,
Tor Atle
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Wildcard-searches
[mailto:toratle...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 6:49 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Wildcard searches and document boost
I have indexed a number of geotagged locations and want the results sorted
by
relevance.
For instance, when searching for wash* I want
For instance, when searching for wash* I want
Washington (the city) to
appear before Washington Park, so I have boosted the
Washington
document. Unfortunately, when using WildcardQuery, the
score is always 1.0.
Luke says my query has been rewritten to
ConstantScore(myField:wash*), so
Thanks Steven and Antony.
I read the FAQ not very long ago, but that slipped my attention. Or
perhaps it's a recent change.
- Øystein -
--
Øystein Reigem, The department of culture, language and information technology (Aksis), Allegt
27, N-5007 Bergen, Norway. Tel: +47 55 58 32 42. Fax: +47
Hi,
I have read that with Lucene it is not possible to do wildcard searches
with * or ? as the first character. Wildcard searches with * as the
first character (or both first and last character) are useful for text
in languages that have a lot of compound words, like German
It's possible to do leading wildcard searches in Lucene as of 2.1. See
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ#head-4d62118417eaef0dcb87f4370583f809848ea695
(http://tinyurl.com/366suf)
-Original Message-
From: Oystein Reigem [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007
I have read that with Lucene it is not possible to do wildcard searches
with * or ? as the first character. Wildcard searches with * as the
Lucene supports it. If you are using QueryParser to parse your queries see
http://lucene.apache.org/java/docs/api/org/apache/lucene/queryParser
Hello,
I am new to Lucene and I am trying to customise the query parser to default
to wildcard searches.
For example, if the user types in fenc, it should find fence and
fencing and fences and fenced.
I can not find a way to modify / extend the QueryParser to automatically
create wildcard
Hi!
I am new to Lucene and I am trying to customise the query parser to default
to wildcard searches.
For example, if the user types in fenc, it should find fence and
fencing and fences and fenced.
Looks like stemming to me! Maybe you should consider using a stemming
analyzer instead. Look
27 matches
Mail list logo
