On 7/6/06, Chris Hostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wow, i'd *just* finished reading the last patch completely through, and now there's a new one ... fortunately i'm familiar with some of these changes (the day someone writes a really good "diff differ" i'll be a very happy man)
Hopefully any further changes will be minor! I appreciate the feedback, as I'm relatively new to both solr and lucene.
A couple of issues that jump out at me (in the new patch)... 1) you changed the SolrPluginUtils.splitList from ",| " to "," ... this eliminates the ability to seperate fields with spaces in query params, which i know is fairly common -- was there a particular reason for that?
Purely a (shocking) typo. Thanks.
2) if a field doesn't generate any snippets, it's still included in the output for that doc ... is this intentional?
By the principle of least surprise, I left in empty fields as it guaranteed that you received what you asked for. It makes sense to drop the field completely if it doesn't exist in the document, though, or if the value is empty. It is a minor change if there is a preference.
3) using the example app with this patch, i tried both of these... http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?indent=on&q=video&fl=id,features&highlight=true&highlightFields=features http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?indent=on&q=features:video&fl=id,features&highlight=true&highlightFields=features ...on my port, i get no highlighting for any doc, even though in both cases there are docs in the result that have the simple term "video" in the features field ... am i doing something wrong, or is this a bug?
I'll check on this and get back to you.
4) if you open a LUCENE-XXXX issue for the QueryTermExtractor issue with DisjunctionMaxQueries, and attach a patch with testcases, and no one objects, i'll commit it :) ... but in the mean time i'm curous what it is about QueryTermExtractor that doesn't work -- it looks like it's fallback behavior is to use "query.extractTerms" and that should do the same thing as your getTermsFromDisjunctionMaxQuery right?
I'm not sure that I follow. For DisMax, you could have a DisjuntionMaxQuery inside a Boolean Query passed to QueryTermExtractor. This would eventually make its way to the private static getTerms method, which switches on the query Class, and does nothign if the Query is not recognized. No?
5)-7)
I agree completely. Thanks for your comments, Hoss, I'll get back to you tomorrow. -Mike
