Re: suggester issues

Finally got it working - turns out you can't just add it to the lib dir as the wiki suggests. Unfortunately the only way is adding it to solr.war. Thanks for your help. -- From: William Oberman ober...@civicscience.com Sent: Friday, August 19,

Re: suggester issues

Sent from my iPhone On Aug 21, 2011, at 5:54 AM, Kuba Krzemien krzemi...@aster.pl wrote: Finally got it working - turns out you can't just add it to the lib dir as the wiki suggests. Unfortunately the only way is adding it to solr.war. Thanks for your help.

Re: Terms.regex performance issue

Wait. Sometimes I get confused because gmail will substitute * for bolding, so in my client it looks like you're searching infix (e.g. leading and trailing wildcards). If that's the case, then your performance will always be poor, it has to enumerate all the terms in the field... If it's just

Re: Too many results in dismax queries with one word

The root problem here is This is unacceptable for my client. The first thing I'd suggest is that you work with your client and get them to define what is acceptable. You'll be forever changing things (to no good purpose) if all they can say is that's not right. For instance, you apparently have

Re: Update field value in the document based on value of another field in the document

Publishing stack traces does no good unless you also tell us what version of Solr you are using. The source-file numbers do move around between versions Also, what line in your code is at the root of this chain? The very first thing I'd do is just comment out your custom code (i.e. just ahve

Re: get update record from database using DIH

At a guess, you're not getting as many rows as you think, and commit has nothing to do with it. But that's just a guess. So the very first thing I'd do is be sure the SQL is doing what you think. There's a little-known data import debugging page that might help:

Re: Too many results in dismax queries with one word

Thanks for reply. I know that sometimes meeting all clients needs would be impossible but then client recalls that competitive (commercial) product already do that (but has other problems, like performance). And then I'm obligated to try more tricks. :/ I'm currently using Solr 3.1 but thinking

Re: Requiring multiple matches of a term

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Michael Ryan mr...@moreover.com wrote: Is there a way to specify in a query that a term must match at least X times in a document, where X is some value greater than 1? One simple way of doing this is maybe to write a wrapper for TermQuery that only returns

Re: Too many results in dismax queries with one word

Would it make sense to have a Did you mean? type of functionality for which you use the EdgeNGram and Metaphone filters /if/ you don't get appropriate results for the user query? So when user types cannon and the application notices that there are no cannons for sale in the index (0 results with

Re: Too many results in dismax queries with one word

I think Sujit has hit the nail on the head. Any program you try to write that tries to guess what the user *really* meant will require endless tinkering and *still* won't be right. If you only knew how annoying I find Google's attempts to help. So perhaps concentrating on some interaction

Re: Terms.regex performance issue

Yeah, I was searching infix. It worked very nice for autocomplete. Made a custom QueryConverter for the Suggester so it gives proper suggestions for shingles. Will stick with that for now. Thanx for the feedback. -- View this message in context:

Re: Too many results in dismax queries with one word

Thanks very much for your advice. I think I now better understand how to make better use of solr. I have tested spellchecker and it looks like it let me to achieve better results and hopefully we will satisfy the client. In my solution I will change user query to use or not to use phonetic fields

Re: Terms.regex performance issue

Ah, in that case, comparing prefix and regex is an apples-to-oranges comparison. I expect regex to be slower, but a fairer comparison would be prefix to stuff* (which may be changed into a prefix enumeration for all I know). But comparing infix to prefix doesn't tell you much really Best

Re: Terms.regex performance issue

Of course. Thats why I compared prefix to bla* and saw it was already a lot slower. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Terms-regex-performance-issue-tp3268994p3273370.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Terms.regex performance issue

I see now in Suggester Wiki; Support for infix-suggestions is planned for FSTLookup (which would be the only structure to support these). -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Terms-regex-performance-issue-tp3268994p3273711.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing

RE: Requiring multiple matches of a term

One simple way of doing this is maybe to write a wrapper for TermQuery that only returns docs with a Term Frequency X as far as I understand the question those terms don't have to be within a certain window right? Correct. Terms can be anywhere in the document. I figured term frequencies

Solr Join with multiple query parameters

Hi all, I am trying to use the Join feature in SOLR trunk with limited sucess. I am able to make simple searches and get the returns of documents as expected. A query such a follows works perfectly fine and as expected:

Re: How to implement Spell Checker using Solr?

The changes for Solrconfig.xml in solr is as follows searchComponent name=spellcheck class=solr.SpellCheckComponent lst name=spellchecker str name=namedefault/str str name=classnamesolr.IndexBasedSpellChecker/str str name=fieldspell/str str