possible bug on Spellchecker

2013-02-20 Thread Samuel García Martínez
Hi all, Debugging Solr spellchecker (IndexBasedSpellchecker, delegating on lucene Spellchecker) behaviour i think i found a bug when the input is a 6 letter word: - george - anthem - argued - fluent Due to the getMin() and getMax() the grams indexed for these terms are 3 and 4. So, the fi

Re: possible bug on Spellchecker

2013-02-20 Thread Jack Krupansky
@lucene.apache.org Subject: possible bug on Spellchecker Hi all, Debugging Solr spellchecker (IndexBasedSpellchecker, delegating on lucene Spellchecker) behaviour i think i found a bug when the input is a 6 letter word: - george - anthem - argued - fluent Due to the getMin() and getMax() the

Re: possible bug on Spellchecker

2013-02-21 Thread Samuel García Martínez
Message- From: Samuel García Martínez > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:34 PM > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: possible bug on Spellchecker > > > Hi all, > > Debugging Solr spellchecker (IndexBasedSpellchecker, delegating on lucene > Spellchecker) behav

RE: possible bug on Spellchecker

2013-02-21 Thread Dyer, James
] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 2:33 AM To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: possible bug on Spellchecker Importance: Low I'm using Solr 3.6 and DirectSpellchecker is available only on v4+. Moreover, in "big" indexes i prefer using sidekick index rather than iterating over

Re: possible bug on Spellchecker

2013-02-21 Thread Samuel García Martínez
t; http://lucene.apache.org/core/4_0_0/suggest/org/apache/lucene/search/spell/DirectSpellChecker.html > > > > > > -- Jack Krupansky > > > > -----Original Message- From: Samuel García Martínez > > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:34 PM > > To: java-user@lucen

Re: possible bug on Spellchecker

2013-02-21 Thread Samuel García Martínez
> Ingram Content Group >> (615) 213-4311 >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Samuel García Martínez [mailto:samuelgmarti...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 2:33 AM >> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: possible bug on