Hi,
to accomplish that, use the highlighting parameters hl.simple.pre and
hl.simple.post.
By the way, there are a plenty of other parameters that affect
highlighting. Take a look at:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HighlightingParameters
-Sascha
Doddamani, Prakash wrote:
Hey,
I thought
Hello,
How am I able to highlight a field that contains a specific value? If I have a
field called type, how am I able to highlight the rows whose values contain
something like title?
*:*/str
!-- example highlighter config, enable per-query with hl=true --
str name=hltrue/str
!-- str name=hl.simple.preb/str
str name=hl.simple.post/b/str --
!-- for this field, we want no fragmenting, just highlighting --
str name=f.name.hl.fragsize0/str
Check that the field you are highlighting on is stored. It won't work
otherwise.
Now, this also means that the field is returned from the query. For large
text fields to be highlighted only, this means the entire text is returned
for each result.
There is a pending feature to address
: Monday, May 24, 2010 9:32 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Highlighting is not happening
Check that the field you are highlighting on is stored. It won't work
otherwise.
Now, this also means that the field is returned from the query. For
large text fields to be highlighted only
Hi Prakash,
more importantly, check the field type and its associated analyzer. In
case you use a non-tokenized type (e.g., string), highlighting will
not appear if only a partial field match exists (only exact matches,
i.e. the query coincides with the field value, will be highlighted
/
/analyzer
/fieldType
Regards
Prakash
-Original Message-
From: Sascha Szott [mailto:sz...@zib.de]
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 10:29 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Highlighting is not happening
Hi Prakash,
more importantly, check the field type and its associated analyzer
Prakash
-Original Message-
From: Sascha Szott [mailto:sz...@zib.de]
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 10:29 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Highlighting is not happening
Hi Prakash,
more importantly, check the field type and its associated analyzer. In
case you use a non
It's not true that highlighting means you have to return the field
from the query too. You can specify fl independently of hl.fl
Erik
On May 24, 2010, at 12:02 PM, dar...@ontrenet.com wrote:
Check that the field you are highlighting on is stored. It won't
work
otherwise.
Now
A. Good to know. Thanks!
On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 16:34 -0400, Erik Hatcher wrote:
It's not true that highlighting means you have to return the field
from the query too. You can specify fl independently of hl.fl
Erik
On May 24, 2010, at 12:02 PM, dar...@ontrenet.com wrote
Hi,
I'm see something odd, but maybe I'm doing something wrong.
I declared a highlight field 'text_t' that is a multivalued stored
indexed text field.
It seems when there are two values, only the last one is used for
highlighting. Missing
a lot of pertinent highlights from the other values
on indexing - if it is not indexed, these mean
nothing and Solr gives you the error message.
highlighting 10 documents that have 200-400 A4 pages still takes
around 2 seconds,
I have never seen terms/second or docs/second benchmarks for
highlighting. This performance is probably what I would
/
copyField source=title dest=short_text /
copyField source=tags dest=short_text /
copyField source=plainText dest=short_text maxChars=2/
copyField source=description dest=short_text /
It gave 168 results, as I expected, and highlighting also worked reasonably
If you want to highlight field X, doing the
termOffsets/termPositions/termVectors will make highlighting that
field faster. You should make a separate field and apply these options
to that field.
Now: doing a copyfield adds a value to a multiValued field. For a
text field, you get a multi-valued
Hi,
Thanks. However as I said before, termOffsets/termPositions/termVectors had
very little effect on the performance and I don't know why. I have done
exactly what you are saying but highlighting 10 documents that have 200-400
A4 pages still takes around 2 seconds, depending on the query. I
, May 9, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Serdar Sahin anlamar...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Thanks. However as I said before, termOffsets/termPositions/termVectors
had very little effect on the performance and I don't know why. I have done
exactly what you are saying but highlighting 10 documents that have 200-400
Do you have these options turned on when you index the text field:
termVectors/termPositions/termOffsets ?
Highlighting needs the information created by these anlysis options.
If they are not turned on, Solr has load the document text and run the
analyzer again with these options on, uses
something and filter it to retrieve documents
that has more than 100 pages, and activate highlighting, it takes 0.8-3
seconds, depending on the query. (10 result per page) If I retrieve
documents that has 1-5 pages, it drops to 0.1 seconds.
If I disable highlighting, it drops to 0.1-0.2 seconds, even
In the solrconfig, is there any way to have a fragmenter that doesn't
escape html in the text? We are going to render the full text of the field
and want to render the text as is (with html in tact).
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Highlighting-Turn
are between
1-500 pages. When I search something and filter it to retrieve documents
that has more than 100 pages, and activate highlighting, it takes 0.8-3
seconds, depending on the query. (10 result per page) If I retrieve
documents that has 1-5 pages, it drops to 0.1 seconds.
If I disable highlighting
Hi Folks,
I am unable to get highlighting to work when searching for exact phrases in
SOLR 1.4
A discussion about the exact same issue can be found here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/solr-user@lucene.apache.org/msg27872.html
Can someone please tell how to fix this?
I am using the parameter
You need to put memory.jar on the classpath along with highlighter.jar.
On 5/4/10 10:38 PM, Karthik Ram wrote:
Hi Folks,
I am unable to get highlighting to work when searching for exact phrases in
SOLR 1.4
A discussion about the exact same issue can be found here:
http://www.mail
unable to get highlighting to work when searching for exact
phrases in
SOLR 1.4
A discussion about the exact same issue can be found here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/solr-user@lucene.apache.org/msg27872.html
Can someone please tell how to fix this?
I am using the parameter
we use dismax and highlighting works fine.
the only thing we had to add to the query-url was
hl.fl=FIELD1,FIELD2
so we had to specify which fields should be used for highlighting.
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: fabritw [mailto:fabr...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28
Hi,
Can highlights be returned when using the dismax request handler?
I read in the below post that I can use a workaround with qf?
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/bug-No-highlighting-results-with-dismax-and-q-alt-td498132.html
Any advise is greatly appreciated.
Regards
=solr.RemoveDuplicatesTokenFilterFactory/
/analyzer
/fieldType
...
field name=title stored=true termVectors=true type=text
multiValued=true indexed=true/
When I search for women's, womens or women I correctly get back all the
results I want. However when I use the highlighting feature it only
Same general question about highlighting the full work sunglasses when I
search for glasses. Is this possible?
Thanks
--
View this message in context:
http://n3.nabble.com/Highlighting-apostrophe-tp731155p731305.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Sent: Thu, April 15, 2010 1:30:22 PM
Subject: bug using distributed search, highlighting and q.alt
I have noticed when using q.alt even if hl=true highlights are not
returned.
When using distributed search, q.alt and hl,
HighlightComponent.java
finishStage expects the highlighting NamedList
I have noticed when using q.alt even if hl=true highlights are not returned.
When using distributed search, q.alt and hl, HighlightComponent.java
finishStage expects the highlighting NamedList of each shard (if hl=true)
but it will never be returned. It will end up with a NullPointerExcepion.
I
I have noticed when using q.alt even if hl=true highlights are not returned.
When using distributed search, q.alt and hl, HighlightComponent.java
finishStage expects the highlighting NamedList of each shard (if hl=true)
but it will never be returned. It will end up with a NullPointerExcepion.
I
No problem: wrapping and unwrapping escaped text can be very confusing.
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 6:31 AM, Niraj Aswani n.asw...@dcs.shef.ac.uk wrote:
Hi Lance,
apologies.. please ignore my previous mail. I'll have a look at the
PatternReplaceFilter.
Thanks,
Niraj
Niraj Aswani wrote:
Hi
Hi Lance,
Yes, that is once solution but wouldn't it stop people searching for
something like choice in the first place? I mean, if I encode such
characters at the index time, one would have to write a query like
lt;choice. Am I right?
Thanks,
Niraj
Lance Norskog wrote:
To display
Hi Lance,
apologies.. please ignore my previous mail. I'll have a look at the
PatternReplaceFilter.
Thanks,
Niraj
Niraj Aswani wrote:
Hi Lance,
Yes, that is once solution but wouldn't it stop people searching for
something like choice in the first place? I mean, if I encode such
Hi,
I am using the following two parameters to highlight the hits.
hl.simple.pre= + URLEncoder.encode(bu)
hl.simple.post= + URLEncoder.encode(/u/b)
This seems to work. However, there is a bit of trouble when the text
itself contains html markup.
For example, I have indexed a document with
To display html-markup in an html page, it has to be in entity-encoded
form. So, encode the as entities in your input application, and
have it indexed and stored in this format. Then, the bu are
inserted as normal. This gives you the html text displayable in an
html page, with all words
indexed=false stored=true /
And here's part of my URL: /?q=TerraindebugQuery=onhl=truehl.fl=title
If I change the type to text instead of string, the highlighting works
well!
Thanks for your help.
-S.
2010/3/23 Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com
Thanks Erik. Actually, I restarted
=string indexed=false
stored=true /
And here's part of my URL:
/?q=TerraindebugQuery=onhl=truehl.fl=title
With q=Terrain you are querying your defaultSearchField and requesting
highlighting from title field.
What is numFound when you hit this url? Highlighting comes?
/?q
to highlight
on:field
name=title type=string indexed=false
stored=true /
And here's part of my URL:
/?q=TerraindebugQuery=onhl=truehl.fl=title
With q=Terrain you are querying your defaultSearchField and requesting
highlighting from title field.
I don't have
there is no
title field. Probably match is coming from title_tokenized, and when you
request highlighting from title (hl.fl=title) it returns empty snippets. If
thats the case it is pretty expected because string typed fields are not
analyzed. I mean there is no partial matches on string fields
I didn't know that you are using dismax. In your query fields list there is
no title field. Probably match is coming from title_tokenized, and when you
request highlighting from title (hl.fl=title) it returns empty snippets. If
thats the case it is pretty expected because string typed fields
2010/3/24 Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com
With this configuration, the title field is highlighted
only when there's a
perfect match, i.e., the quoted query equals the title
content (f.i.,
q=Terrain sehloul allows highlighting the entire title
containing Terrain
sehloul,
Exactly
Thank a lot Ahmet. In addition, I want to highlight phrases
containing stop
words. I guess that the best way is to use a tokenized type
without
stopwordFilter. Do you agree with me defining a new type
for this purpose ?
I am not sure about that. May be solr.CommonGramsFilterFactory can do
2010/3/24 Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com
Thank a lot Ahmet. In addition, I want to highlight phrases
containing stop
words. I guess that the best way is to use a tokenized type
without
stopwordFilter. Do you agree with me defining a new type
for this purpose ?
I am not sure about
Yes, that's what I was expecting. Actually, I'd like
to highlight phrases
containing stopwords, like emTerrain à sehloul/em
Lucene's FastVectorHighlighter[1] can do that kind of phrase highlighting.
It seems that solr integration [2] has finished. You need to apply SOLR-1268
patch.
[1]http
] can do that kind of phrase highlighting.
It seems that solr integration [2] has finished. You need to apply
SOLR-1268 patch.
[1]
http://lucene.apache.org/java/3_0_1/api/contrib-fast-vector-highlighter/org/apache/lucene/search/vectorhighlight/FastVectorHighlighter.html
[2]http
Hello,
Check out the wiki [1] on what options to use for highlighting and other
components.
[1]: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FieldOptionsByUseCase
Cheers,
On Tuesday 23 March 2010 17:11:42 Saïd Radhouani wrote:
I have trouble with highlighting field of type string. It looks like
filter. Any idea?
Thanks a lot,
-S.
Thanks
2010/3/23 Markus Jelsma mar...@buyways.nl
Hello,
Check out the wiki [1] on what options to use for highlighting and other
components.
[1]: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FieldOptionsByUseCase
Cheers,
On Tuesday 23 March 2010 17:11:42 Saïd
not working. I use and as you can see in my fieldType, I don't have
a stopword filter. Any idea?
Thanks a lot,
-S.
Thanks
2010/3/23 Markus Jelsma mar...@buyways.nl
Hello,
Check out the wiki [1] on what options to use for highlighting and other
components.
[1]: http
),
but
it's not working. I use and as you can see in my fieldType, I don't
have
a stopword filter. Any idea?
Thanks a lot,
-S.
Thanks
2010/3/23 Markus Jelsma mar...@buyways.nl
Hello,
Check out the wiki [1] on what options to use for highlighting and
other
Thanks Erik. Actually, I restarted
and reindexed numers of time, but still
not working.
Highlighting on string typed fields perferctly works. See the output of :
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=id%3ASOLR1000version=2.2start=0rows=10indent=onhl=truehl.fl=id
But there must be a match/hit
/browse/SOLR-1397
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 4:09 PM, dbejean dominique.bej...@eolya.fr
wrote:
Hello,
Just in order to be able to show term highlighting in my results list, I
store all the indexed data in the Lucene index and so, it is very huge
(108Gb). Is there any possibilities to do
dominique.bej...@eolya.fr wrote:
Hello,
Just in order to be able to show term highlighting in my results list, I
store all the indexed data in the Lucene index and so, it is very huge
(108Gb). Is there any possibilities to do it in an other way ? Now or in the
future, is it possible that Solr
Hello,
Just in order to be able to show term highlighting in my results list, I
store all the indexed data in the Lucene index and so, it is very huge
(108Gb). Is there any possibilities to do it in an other way ? Now or in the
future, is it possible that Solr use a 3nd-party tool
Can anyone help ??
Begin forwarded message:
From: Lee Smith l...@weblee.co.uk
Date: 11 March 2010 17:25:59 GMT
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Highlighting Results
Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Hi All
Im not sure where i'm going wrong but highlighting does not seem
-Original Message-
From: Lee Smith [mailto:l...@weblee.co.uk]
Sent: 12 March 2010 08:43
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Fwd: Highlighting Results
Can anyone help ??
Begin forwarded message:
From: Lee Smith l...@weblee.co.uk
Date: 11 March 2010 17:25:59 GMT
To: solr-user
Hi All
Im not sure where i'm going wrong but highlighting does not
seem to work for me.
I have indexed around 5000 PDF documents which went well.
Running normal queries against the attr_content works
well.
When adding any hl code it does not seem to make a bit of
difference
Hi everybody,
I would need a little help understanding what seems to be a rather erratic
behavior in Solr Highlighting.
In my query I want the field text to be summarized, and want a maximum of 300
characters and 3 snippets.
I have therefore set fragsize=100 and snippets=3.
But there seems
With the highlighting options will Solr highlight the found text something like
google search does ?
I cant seem to get this working ?
Hope someone can advise.
Please see:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingLists
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/UsingMailingListsand repost with additional
information.
Best
Erick
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Lee Smith l...@weblee.co.uk wrote:
With the highlighting options will Solr highlight the found text
Hi All
Im not sure where i'm going wrong but highlighting does not seem to work for me.
I have indexed around 5000 PDF documents which went well.
Running normal queries against the attr_content works well.
When adding any hl code it does not seem to make a bit of difference.
Here
Yes Content is stored and I get same results adding that parameter.
Still not highlighting the content :-(
Any other ideas
Lee
On 9 Mar 2010, at 23:14, Ahmet Arslan wrote:
Yes it shows when I run the debug
-lst
name=org.apache.solrhandler.component.HighlightComponent
double name
Yes Content is stored and I get same
results adding that parameter.
Still not highlighting the content :-(
Any other ideas
What is the field type of attr_content? And what is your query?
Are you running your query on another field and then requesting snippets from
attr_content
wrote:
Yes Content is stored and I get same
results adding that parameter.
Still not highlighting the content :-(
Any other ideas
What is the field type of attr_content? And what is your query?
Are you running your query on another field and then requesting snippets from
attr_content
message:
From: Joe Calderon calderon@gmail.com
Date: 10 March 2010 15:37:35 GMT
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Highlighting
Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
just to make sure were on the same page, youre saying that the
highlight section of the response is empty right
:[
{
title_id:1581,
title_edge:Family,
num:4}]
},
highlighting:{
1581:{
title_edge:[emFami/emly]}}
see how the highlight info is separate from the results?
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 7:44 AM, Lee Smith l...@weblee.co.uk wrote:
Im am getting results no problem
Cant see why you would put highlighting in a separate field.
Isn't it the idea to highlight the content found in a search result like google
would do ?
Lee
On 10 Mar 2010, at 15:52, Joe Calderon wrote:
no, thats not the case, see this example response in json format:
{
responseHeader
Hey All
I have indexed a whole bunch of documents and now I want to search against them.
My search is going great all but highlighting.
I have these items set
hl=true
hl.snippets=2
hl.fl = attr_content
hl.fragsize=100
Everything works apart from the highlighted text found not being surrounded
did u enable the highlighting component in solrconfig.xml? try setting
debugQuery=true to see if the highlighting component is even being
called...
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lee Smith l...@weblee.co.uk wrote:
Hey All
I have indexed a whole bunch of documents and now I want to search
Yes it shows when I run the debug
-lst name=org.apache.solrhandler.component.HighlightComponent
double name=time0.0/double
/lst
Any other ideas ?
On 9 Mar 2010, at 21:06, Joe Calderon wrote:
did u enable the highlighting component in solrconfig.xml? try setting
debugQuery=true to see
Yes it shows when I run the debug
-lst
name=org.apache.solrhandler.component.HighlightComponent
double name=time0.0/double
/lst
Any other ideas ?
is the field attr_content stored? Are you querying this field? What happens
when you append hl.maxAnalyzedChars=-1 to your search
=tablehl=truehl.fl=htmlfieldhl.fragsize=0
It would be tokenized with the HTMLStripStandardTokenizerFactory, then
analyzed the same way as the searcheable fields.
Could this result in highlighting inside HTML tags (I mean thinks like
emtable/em.../emtable/em) ?
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
in highlighting inside HTML tags (I mean thinks like
emtable/em.../emtable/em) ?
well ok I guess that makes sense and I tried changing my
title field to text
type and then highlighting worked on it .. but
1) as far as not merging all fields in catchall field and
instead
configuring the dismax handler to search through them .. do
you mean then
ill have to specify
hi
i am trying to get highlighting working and its turning out to be a pain.
here is my schema
field name=id type=string indexed=true stored=true required=true
/
field name=title type=string indexed=true stored=true /
field name=pi type=string indexed=true stored=true /
field name=status
All of your fields seem to be of a string type, that's why the highlighting
doesn't work.
The highlighting fields must be tokenized before you can do the highlighting on
them.
Jan.
--- On Fri, 2/19/10, adeelmahmood adeelmahm...@gmail.com wrote:
From: adeelmahmood adeelmahm...@gmail.com
well ok I guess that makes sense and I tried changing my title field to text
type and then highlighting worked on it .. but
1) as far as not merging all fields in catchall field and instead
configuring the dismax handler to search through them .. do you mean then
ill have to specify the field I
take it out .. it
throws
an error so it seems its important but what for ???
also I tried turning on the highlighting and i can see that it adds the
highlighting items list in the xml at the end .. but it only points out
the
ids of all the matching results .. it doesnt actually shows the text data
part does .. if i take it out .. it throws
an error so it seems its important but what for ???
also I tried turning on the highlighting and i can see that it adds the
highlighting items list in the xml at the end .. but it only points out the
ids of all the matching results .. it doesnt actually
.. it throws
an error so it seems its important but what for ???
also I tried turning on the highlighting and i can see that it adds the
highlighting items list in the xml at the end .. but it only points out the
ids of all the matching results .. it doesnt actually shows the text data
thats its
tried turning on the highlighting and i can see that it adds the
highlighting items list in the xml at the end .. but it only points out
the
ids of all the matching results .. it doesnt actually shows the text data
thats its making a match with // so i am getting something like this back
lst name
Hi all,
After analysing the highlighting inconsistency [Highlighting Inconsistency
email tree] I was wondering if I should open a jira issue? Can you advise me if
that's a sensible thing to do?
So the issue is:
* A query is done on a certain field (i.e. title) which is unstemmed
Hi gurus,
I am having some issues with making the highlighting work properly. If I search
for a word in a title field and request a highlighted summary from another
long_description field, this works on some documents, but on some doesn't.
Have you seen anything like this before?
Example
I am
having some issues with making the highlighting work
properly. If I search for a word in a title
field and request a highlighted summary from another
long_description field, this works on some
documents, but on some doesn't. Have you seen anything
like this before?
Default value
I am
having some issues with making the highlighting work
properly. If I search for a word in a title
field and request a highlighted summary from another
long_description field, this works on some
documents, but on some doesn't. Have you seen anything
like this before?
Default
The contents of the long_description field are actually
pretty short - max. 2000 characters. But I've tried setting
it to -1 as well, and still the same results.
Then we should confirm that long_description really contains term terminator.
What is numFound when you execute this query?
highlighting list.
in the
long_description files I do get the highlighted summary
returned ok (your query produced a highlight). But if I want
to search only the title, but specify the long_description
as a highlight field, the result is empty highlighting list.
Interesting there is a parameter
Interesting there is a parameter (hl.requireFieldMatch) about this but
default
value is false.
Interesting indeed! I have tried setting hl.requireFieldMatch manually to false
before - but no luck.
Are you using some default highlighting parameters defined in solrconfig.xml?
You can
tokenizer defined - and the results
were the same.
Hmm. That difference might causing it. Because parsed query will different for
title and long_description field due to stemmer. I don't know if the query is
re-parsed using long_description's analyzer during highlighting. What happens
if you query
back to the text type, cleared and re-indexed
and the highlighting was gone. The conclusion: the type mismatch between the
query you're searching on and the field that you want to use as a highlighting
source can cause issues, if different.
Should that be fixed or just noted down?
Fr can
match France.
This all seems to work, the autosuggest box gives appropriate
suggestions. But when I turn on highlighting the results are less than
desirable, for example the query rho using dismax (and hl.snippets=5)
returns the following:
lst name=5119
arr name=names
stremRég/emion
during
analysis so the query Fr can match France.
This all seems to work, the autosuggest box gives
appropriate suggestions. But when I turn on highlighting the
results are less than desirable, for example the query rho
using dismax (and hl.snippets=5) returns the
following:
lst name=5119
arr name
-matching prefixes. That's a really interesting quirk
of highlighting.
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 6:18 AM, gwk g...@eyefi.nl wrote:
On 2/9/2010 2:57 PM, Ahmet Arslan wrote:
I'm trying to improve the search box on our website by
adding an autosuggest field. The dataset is a set of
properties
when i set hl.highlightMultiTerm=false the term that matches the wild
card is not highlighted at all, ideally ide like a partial highlight
(the characters before the wildcard), but if not i can live without it
thx much for the help
--joe
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Mark Miller
hello *, currently with hl.usePhraseHighlighter=true, a query for (joe
jack*) will highlight emjoe jackson/em, however after reading the
archives, what im looking for is the old 1.1 behaviour so that only
emjoe jack/em is highlighted, is this possible in solr 1.5 ?
thx much
--joe
On iPhone so don't remember exact param I named it, but check wiki -
something like hl.highlightMultiTerm - set it to false.
- Mark
http://www.lucidimagination.com (mobile)
On Feb 6, 2010, at 12:00 AM, Joe Calderon calderon@gmail.com
wrote:
hello *, currently with
xavier.schep...@sciences-po.fr wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to highlight short text values. The field they came from has a
type shared with other fields. I have highlighting working on other fields
but not on this one.
Why ?
Thanks for your response.
Here are some extracts from my
at 7:47 AM, Xavier Schepler
xavier.schep...@sciences-po.fr wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to highlight short text values. The field they came from has a
type shared with other fields. I have highlighting working on other fields
but not on this one.
Why ?
Thanks for your
=id1/field
field name=sku_newA 1280 C/field
/doc
/add
Doing a query for A 1280 C and requesting highlighting throws the
exception (full stack trace below):
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=sku_new%3A%22A+1280+C%22version=2.2start=0rows=10indent=onhl=onhl.fl=sku_newfl=*
If I comment
Here's the field definition:
field name=sku_new type=textSku indexed=true stored=true
omitNorms=true/
Here's a sample doc:
add
doc
field name=id1/field
field name=sku_newA 1280 C/field
/doc
/add
Doing a query for A 1280 C and requesting highlighting throws
901 - 1000 of 1278 matches
Mail list logo
