> Hi
> i have a question regarding synonymfilter
> i have a one way mapping defined
> austin martin, astonmartin => aston martin
>
...
>
> Can anybody please explain if my observation is correct. This is a very
> critical aspect for my work.
That is correct - the synonym filter can recognize mul
> The DisMax parser essentially creates a set of queries against
> different fields. These queries are analyzed as per each field.
>
> I think this what you are talking about- "The" in a movie title is
> diffferent from "the" in the movie description. Would you expect "The
> Sound Of Music" to fet
> No- there are various analyzers. StandardAnalyzer is geared toward
> searching bodies of text for interesting words - punctuation is
> ripped out. Other analyzers are more useful for "concrete" text. You
> may have to work at finding one that leaves punctuation in.
>
My problem is not with the
> Here's my question:
> I have some products that I want to allow people to search for with
> wild cards. For example, if my product is YBM354, I'd like for users to
> be able to search on "YBM*", "YBM3*", "YBM35*" and for any of these
> searches to return that product. I've found that I can search
Hi-
let's say you have two indexed fields, "F1" and "F2". F1 uses the
StandardAnalyzer, while F2 doesn't. Now imagine you index a document where you
have
F1="A & B"
F2="C + D"
Now imagine you run a query:
(F1:A OR F2:A) AND (F1:B OR F2:B)
in other words, both "A" and "B" must exist in at
> Does this mean I should have converted my objects to string before
> writing them to the server?
>
I believe SolrJ takes care of that for you by calling toString(), but you would
need to convert explicitly when you query (and then escape).
You can escape the string with
org.apache.lucene.queryParser.QueryParser.escape(String query)
http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_4_0/api/org/apache/lucene/queryParser/QueryParser.html#escape%28java.lang.String%29
> -Original Message-
> From: ptomb...@gmail.com [mailto:ptomb...@gmail.com]
> > It looks like things have changed a bit since this subject was last
> > brought
> > up here. I see that there are support in Solr/Lucene for indexing
> > payload
> > data (DelimitedPayloadTokenFilterFactory and
> > DelimitedPayloadTokenFilter).
> > Overriding the Similarity class is straight f
> Ok still not working with new field "text_two":
> "text:"Har*" text_two:"Har*""
> ==> result 0
>
> Schema Updates:
> "
> positionIncrementGap="100">
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> multiValued="true"/>
>
>
> "
I'm pretty s
> The problem is that the indexed form of this XML is flattened so the
>
> entity has 2 garage names, 2 min values and 2 max values, but the
> grouping
> between the garage name and it's min and max values is lost. The
> danger is
> that we end up doing a comparison of the min-of-the-mins and the
> Hey Ken,
> Thanks for your reply.
> When I wrote '5|6' I ment that this is a multiValued field with two
> values
> '5' and '6', rather than the literal string '5|6' (and any Tokenizer).
> Does
> your reply still holds? That is, are multiValued fields dependent on
> the
> notion of tokenization t
> Hey,
> I have a field defined as such:
>
> stored="false"
> multiValued="true" />
>
> with the string type defined as:
>
> omitNorms="true"/>
>
> When I try using some query-time boost parameters using the bq on
> values of
> this field it seems to behave
> strangely in case of documents actua
> You haven't given us the full details on how you are using the
> SynonymFilterFactory ("expand" true or false?) but in general: yes the
> SynonymFilter finds the longest match it can.
Sorry - doing expansion at index time:
>
> if every svp is also a vp, then being explict in your synonyms (whe
> >> Filter queries with arbitrary text values may swamp the cache in
> 1.3.
> >
> > Are you implying this won't happen in 1.4?
>
> I intended to say just this, but I was on the wrong track.
>
> > Can you point me to the feature that would mitigate this?
>
> What I was thinking of is the followin
> Filter queries with arbitrary text values may swamp the cache in 1.3.
Are you implying this won't happen in 1.4? Can you point me to the feature
that would mitigate this?
>
> Otherwise, the combinations aren't infinite. Keep the filters seperate
> in order to limit their number. Specify two s
That's a great question. And the answer is, of course, it depends. Mostly on
the size of the documents you are indexing. 50 million rows from a database
table with a handful of columns is very different from 50 million web pages,
pdf documents, books, etc.
We currently have about 50 million
We have a field with index-time synonyms called "title". Among the entries in
the synonyms file are
vp,vice president
svp,senior vice president
However, a search for "vp" does not return results where the title is "senior
vice president". It appears that the term "vp" is not indexed when ther
> ?q=facetFormat_product_s:"Pfqs ePub eBook Sfqs"&qt=dismaxrequest - dose
> not
> return results,
> although field facetFormat_product_s is defined in dismaxrequest
> Handler of
> solrconfig.xml
When you use the dismax handler, you don't need to specify the field in the
query string. It's meant
The recent discussion of filter queries has got me thinking about other ways to
improve performance of our app. We have an index with a lot of fields and we
support both single-search-box style queries using DisMax and fielded search
using the standard query handler. We also support using both
> -Original Message-
> From: Fergus McMenemie [mailto:fer...@twig.me.uk]
> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 3:41 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: fq vs. q
>
> >On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Michael Ludwig
> wrote:
> >
> >> I've summarized what I've learnt about filter qu
> When I try testing the filter "solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory" I get
> different results calling the following urls:
>
> 1. http://[server-ip]:[server-port]/solr/[core-
> name]/select/?q=all%3Apapa&version=2.2&start=0&rows=10&indent=on
> 2. http://[server-ip]:[server-port]/solr/[core-
> name]/sele
>
> A Unit test would be ideal, but even if you can just provide a list of
> steps (ie: using this solrconfig+schema, index these docs, then update
> this one doc, then execute this search) it can help people track things
> down.
>
> Please open a bug and attach as much detail as you can there.
>
>
> Hello Solrites (or Solrorians)
I prefer "Solrdier" :)
>
> Is it possible to get the average ranking score for a set of docs that
> would be returned for a given facet value.
>
> If not in SOLR, what about Lucene?
>
> How hard to implement?
>
> I have years of Java experience, but no Lucene codi
> Yeah great idea, thanks. Does anyone know if there is code out there
> that
> will do this sort of thing?
>
Perhaps a much simpler option would be to use this:
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/api/org/apache/solr/analysis/PatternReplaceFilterFactory.html
with a regex of "<[^>]*>" or something lik
I believe you can use a function query to do this:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery
if you embed the following in your query, you should get a boost for more
recent date values:
_val_:"ord(dateField)"
Where "dateField" is the field name of the date you want to use.
> -Original Me
> Hi,
>
> I'm storing some raw xml in solr (stored and non-tokenized). I'd like
> to
> highlight hits in the response, obviously this is problematic as the
> highlighting elements are also xml. So if I match an attribute value or
> tag
> name, the xml response is messed up. Is there a way to highli
> >> Yes, but dates are fairly spesific, say 06:45 Nov. 2 , 2009. What if
> I
> >> want to say "Sort so that withing entries for Nov. 2 , you sort by
> >> relevance" for example?
> >>
> >
> > Append "/DAY" to the date value you index, for example
> >
> > "1995-12-31T23:59:59Z/DAY" will yield "1995-
Add the following parameters to the url:
hl=true&hl.fl=xhtml
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HighlightingParameters
> -Original Message-
> From: Bertrand DUMAS-PILHOU [mailto:bdum...@eurocortex.fr]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 4:43 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Highl
> Yes, but dates are fairly spesific, say 06:45 Nov. 2 , 2009. What if I
> want to say "Sort so that withing entries for Nov. 2 , you sort by
> relevance" for example?
>
Append "/DAY" to the date value you index, for example
"1995-12-31T23:59:59Z/DAY" will yield "1995-12-31"
So that all document
I've never used them personally, but I think a function query would suit you
here. Function queries allow you to define a custom function as a component of
the score of a result document. Define a distance function based on the user's
current location and the that of the search result, such th
> Every product we have comes in colour and size combinations,
> I need to do a
> faceted search on these that allows for colour and size and
> various other
> fields. A single product may have multiple colours and multiple sizes.
>
> For example a style might be available in black size 12, but
>
> I'm no QueryParser expert, but I would probably start w/ the default
> query parser in Solr (LuceneQParser), and then progress a bit to the
> DisMax one. I'd ask specific questions based on what you see there.
> If you get far enough along, you may consider asking for help on the
> java-user li
type of
thing in our existing search implementation. Thanks for the quick response!
> On Sep 23, 2008, at 5:12 PM, Ensdorf Ken wrote:
>
> > Hi-
> >
> > I'm new to Solr, and I'm trying to figure out the best way to
> > configure it to use BoostingTermQ
Hi-
I'm new to Solr, and I'm trying to figure out the best way to configure it to
use BoostingTermQuery in the scoring mechanism. Do I need to create a custom
query parser? All I want is the default parser behavior except to get the
custom term boost from the Payload data. Thanks!
-Ken
34 matches
Mail list logo
