as the
first does *not* double your index size at all.
-Original Message-
From: Dmitry Kan [mailto:dmitry@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:06 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: stemming for English
Yes, Ludovic. Thus effectively we get index doubled. Given
Dear list,
In SOLR schema on the index side we use no stemming to support favor
wildcard search. On the query side of the index we use Porter stemming.
I have noticed the following issue: the term pretty gets stemmed to
pretti and thus not found.
What would be the approach to handle such
?
--
Regards,
Dmitry Kan
--
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
below:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/stemming-for-English-tp2893599p2893599.html
To start a new topic under Solr - User, email
ml-node+472068-1765922688-383
,
Dmitry Kan
--
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
below:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/stemming-for-English-tp2893599p2893599.html
To start a new topic under Solr - User, email
ml-node+472068-1765922688
to go for a full-blown support of
wildcards.
Do you know of a way to keep both stemming and consistent wildcard support
in the same field?`
Dmitry
-
Jouve
France.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/stemming-for-English-tp2893599p2893652.html
Sent
.
Do you know of a way to keep both stemming and consistent wildcard
support
in the same field?`
Dmitry
-
Jouve
France.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/stemming-for-English-tp2893599p2893652.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list
From what I have seen, adding a second field with the same terms as the first
does *not* double your index size at all.
-Original Message-
From: Dmitry Kan [mailto:dmitry@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 4:06 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: stemming for English
