Re: edismax, phrase field gets ignored for keyword tokenizer

Hi Stefan, I've been very busy today, I've read your mail but no time to write an answer. So now at last, finally everybody is sleeping around me :) Let's start from the very beginning, sorry if I didn't get everything about your first question, I just got you're unable to find the phone number

Re: edismax, phrase field gets ignored for keyword tokenizer

Any more thoughts on this? The longer i look at this situation, the more i’m thinking i’m at fault here - expection something that isn’t to be expected at all? Whatever is on your mind once you’ve read mail - don’t keep to it, let me know. -Stefan On November 7, 2016 at 5:23:58 PM, Stefan

Re: edismax, phrase field gets ignored for keyword tokenizer

Which is everything fine by itself - but doesn’t shed more light on my initial question Vincenzo, does it? probably i shoudn’t have mentioned partial matches in the first place, that might have lead into the wrong direction - they are not relevant for now / not for this question. I’d like to know

Re: edismax, phrase field gets ignored for keyword tokenizer

If you don't want partial matches with edismax you should always use StandardTokenizerFactory and play with mm parameter. On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Stefan Matheis wrote: > Vincenzo, > > thanks for the response - i know that only the Keyword Tokenizer by > itself

Re: edismax, phrase field gets ignored for keyword tokenizer

Vincenzo, thanks for the response - i know that only the Keyword Tokenizer by itself does not do anything. as pointed at the end of the initial mail, i’m applying a pattern replace for everything non-numeric to make it actually useful. and especially because of the tokenization based on

Re: edismax, phrase field gets ignored for keyword tokenizer

Hi Stefan, I think the problem is solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory. This tokeniser does not make any tokenisation to the string, it returns exactly what you have. '+49 1234 12345678' -> '+49 1234 12345678' On the other hand, using edismax you are looking for '+49', '1234' and '12345678' and none of