On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 10:51 AM Arturas Mazeika wrote:
...
> Similarly, there's the
> hl.qparser parameter, but the documentation of that parameter is not as
> rich (the documentation says, that the default value is lucene). I am
> wondering are there other alternatives available? In case you ar
Hi David,
Thanks a lot for the reply and the infos.
I suspected that the minimum on the indexing/storage side was that hl.fl
need to be "stored". I understand that my expression "minimal requirements"
are totally loose/unclear, I wasn't sure how to formulate that as (i) I am
not yet sure how to e
Thanks for your review!
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:56 AM Arturas Mazeika wrote:
...
> What I missed at the beginning of the documentation is the minimal set of
> requirements that is reacquired to have highlighting sensible: somehow I
> have a feeling that one needs some of the information stored
Hi David,
Thanks a lot for the reply, the effort to update the documentation, and
have the documentation reflect the question I posted here.
I've read the doc you provided. I've read the updated parts and the the
document as carefully as I could. I've browsed and skimmed part of the
document (whe
Hi Arturas,
Both Erick and I had a go at improving the documentation here. I hope it's
clearer.
https://builds.apache.org/job/Solr-reference-guide-master/javadoc/highlighting.html
The docs for hl.fl, hl.q, hl.qparser were all updated. The meat of the
change was a new note in hl.fl including an e
Arturas:
Thanks for the "atta boy's", but I have to confess I poked a
developer's list and the person (David Smiley) who, you know, like
understands the highlighting code replied, and I passed it on ;
I have great respect for the SO forum, but don't post to it since
there's only so much time in a
Hi Erick,
Adding a field-qualify to the hl.q parameter solved the issue. My
excitement is steaming over the roof! What a thorough answer: the
explanation about the behavior of solr, how it tries to interpret what I
mean when I supply a keyword without the field-qualifier. Very impressive.
Would yo
Arturas:
Try to field-qualify your hl.q parameter. That looks like:
hl.q=trans:Kundigung
or
hl.q=trans:Kündigung
I saw the exact behavior you describe when I did _not_ specify the
field in the hl.q parameter, i.e.
hl.q=Kundigung
or
hl.q=Kündigung
didn't show all highlights.
But when I did spe
Hi Erick,
Thanks for the update and the infos. Your post brought quite a bit of light
into the picture and now I understand quite a bit more about what you are
saying. Your explanation makes sense and can be quite useful in certain
scenarious.
What stroke me from your description is that you are
bq: this is not a typical case that one searches for a keyword but
highlights something else
This isn't really an unusual case, apparently I mislead you.
What I was trying to convey is that the analysis chain used is firmly
attached to a particular _field_. There's no way to say "use one
analysis
Hi Mathesis (Stefan),
Thanks for the questions. This made me look at the problem from a distance
and re-frame the situation. Good questions indeed.
Trying to go around: consider a user who describes herself as being a BMW
fan, being convinced that all BMW need to be the blackest color possible
(f
Perhaps we try it the other way round .. what's your use case for this? I'm
trying to think of a situation where I'd need this a as user?
The only reason I see myself doing this is CTRL+F in a page when the search
result is not immediately visible for me ;)
On Mar 23, 2018 9:41 AM, "Arturas Maze
Hi Erick et al,
>From your answer I understand that this is not a typical case that one
searches for a keyword but highlights something else. Since we have two
parameters (q vs hl.q) I thought they are freely combinable. From your
answer I understand that this is not really the case. My current
un
Basically you need to use a copyField, but in several variants:
If you use the field _exclusively_ for highlighting then store the raw
content there and have the field use whatever analyzer you want. You
do _not_ need to have indexed="true" set for the field if you're
highlighting on the fly. So y
Hi Solr-Users,
I've been playing with a german collection of documents, where I tried to
search for one word (q=Tag) and highlighted another: (hl.q=Kundigung). Is
this a "legal" use case? My key question is how can I tell solr which query
analyzer to use for highlighting? Strictly speaking, I shou
15 matches
Mail list logo
