: I have a use case where I would like to search across two fields but I do not
: want to weight a document that has a match in both fields higher than a
: document that has a match in only 1 field.
use dismax, set the "tie" param to "0.0" (so it's a true "max" with no
score boost for matching i
Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> From: Mark
> >>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> >>> Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 8:12 PM
> >>> Subject: Searching
ext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch
>> Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/
>>
>>
>>>
>>> From: Mark
>>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>>> Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 8:12 PM
>
Searching multiple fields
I have a use case where I would like to search across two fields but I do not
want to weight a document that has a match in both fields higher than a
document that has a match in only 1 field.
For example.
Document 1
- Field A: "Foo Bar"
- Field B: "Foo
_
>From: Mark
>To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
>Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 8:12 PM
>Subject: Searching multiple fields
>
>I have a use case where I would like to search across two fields but I do not
>want to weight a document that has a match in both fields higher tha
I have a use case where I would like to search across two fields but I
do not want to weight a document that has a match in both fields higher
than a document that has a match in only 1 field.
For example.
Document 1
- Field A: "Foo Bar"
- Field B: "Foo Baz"
Document 2
- Field A: "Foo Blar
Yonik Seeley wrote:
There is your issue: type "string" indexes the whole field value as a
single token.
You want type "text" like you have on the name field.
yep, i noticed that right after i hit send. things are working now.
sorry, i did say i was a newbie!
-jsd-
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Jon Drukman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yonik Seeley wrote:
>>
>> Verify all the fields you want to search on indexed
>> Verify that the query is being correctly built by adding
>> debugQuery=true to the request
>
> here is the schema.xml extract:
>
>required="t
Yonik Seeley wrote:
Verify all the fields you want to search on indexed
Verify that the query is being correctly built by adding
debugQuery=true to the request
here is the schema.xml extract:
required="true" />
here is the debugQuery output. i have no idea how to read
Jon,
As a nearly ex-newbie you are experiencing some similar things I did.
If you are using the default set-up of Solr, make sure in your
schema.xml you are indexing the fields you want to search, at least
for now, as text fields. One way you can scale this easily for
example if your sche
Verify all the fields you want to search on indexed
Verify that the query is being correctly built by adding
debugQuery=true to the request
-Yonik
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 1:53 PM, Jon Drukman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am brand new to Solr. I am trying to get a very simple setup running.
>
I am brand new to Solr. I am trying to get a very simple setup running.
I've got just a few fields: name, description, tags. I am only able
to search on the default field (name) however. I tried to set up the
dismax config to search all the fields, but I never get any results on
the other f
On Thursday 02 August 2007 20:18, Walter Underwood wrote:
> I agree about the fussiness and mystery of good values for minimum
> match, but the requestor wanted 100% all the time. That is easy.
But I want it only by default, with an easy way to go back to OR for parts
of the query, e.g. doing a
I agree about the fussiness and mystery of good values for minimum match,
but the requestor wanted 100% all the time. That is easy.
I think spell suggestions are harder than search, so "assume great spell
suggestions" is not a good fix for a bad default (all terms).
wunder
On 8/2/07 11:13 AM, "
On Thursday 02 August 2007 18:46, Walter Underwood wrote:
> Use the minimum match spec for a flexible version of all-terms
> matching.
I think this is too difficult and unpredictable. I also don't know how I
should justify a setting like "75%", just because it maybe works fine for
some examples
Use the minimum match spec for a flexible version of all-terms
matching.
Before implementing all-terms matching, start logging the number of
searches that result in no matches. All-terms can cause big problems.
One wrong or misspelled word means no matches, and searchers don't
know how to fix the
On Wednesday 01 August 2007 09:47, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> for the record, using the Lucene boolean options "+" and "-" do work in
> the "q" expression for the dismax handler ... for that matter, the
> boolean keywords AND, OR, and NOT work as well
The only case that doesn't seem to work (and th
ROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 12:48 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: searching multiple fields
>
>
> : > StandardRequestHandler), but I also want to be able to use Lucene's
> : > boolean syntax (AND/OR/NOT). This doesn't s
che.org
Subject: Re: searching multiple fields
: > StandardRequestHandler), but I also want to be able to use Lucene's
: > boolean syntax (AND/OR/NOT). This doesn't seem to be supported by
: > DisMaxRequestHandler. I will need to copy or extend
for the record, using the Luc
This caused me a certain amount of trouble, because the parser
errors with ill-formed queries. Try these:
foo -
TO HAVE AND HAVE NOT
wunder
On 8/1/07 12:47 AM, "Chris Hostetter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : > StandardRequestHandler), but I also want to be able to use Lucene's
> : > b
: > StandardRequestHandler), but I also want to be able to use Lucene's
: > boolean syntax (AND/OR/NOT). This doesn't seem to be supported by
: > DisMaxRequestHandler. I will need to copy or extend
for the record, using the Lucene boolean options "+" and "-" do work in
the "q" expression for the
m .= (($nbField>1)?')':'');
$query = substr_replace( $query, $term, $matches[0][$i][1],
strlen($matches[0][$i][0]) );}}
}}}return $query;}Hope this can
help.Pierr
On 30-Jul-07, at 3:34 PM, Daniel Naber wrote:
Hi,
I want to search multiple fields by default (which is no supported by
StandardRequestHandler), but I also want to be able to use Lucene's
boolean syntax (AND/OR/NOT). This doesn't seem to be supported by
DisMaxRequestHandler. I will need to cop
Hi,
I want to search multiple fields by default (which is no supported by
StandardRequestHandler), but I also want to be able to use Lucene's
boolean syntax (AND/OR/NOT). This doesn't seem to be supported by
DisMaxRequestHandler. I will need to copy or extend StandardRequestHandler
and modify
24 matches
Mail list logo
