[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-756?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12630231#action_12630231 ]
Mark Miller commented on SOLR-756: ---------------------------------- Ah, your right, I've gotten a bit lost floating between these issues and the mailing list email that led me here. I am not opposed to anything you have done. Just enriching the issue with some discussion <g> My point is only what I have said, and as you say, while mildly connected to this issue, is more leveled at 758. I don't really have anything to say against this patch in particular, and I apologize for the confusion. Looking at the code, seems reasonable to me. > Make DisjunctionMaxQueryParser generally useful by supporting all query types. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: SOLR-756 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-756 > Project: Solr > Issue Type: Improvement > Affects Versions: 1.3 > Reporter: David Smiley > Attachments: SolrPluginUtilsDisMax.patch > > > This is an enhancement to the DisjunctionMaxQueryParser to work on all the > query variants such as wildcard, prefix, and fuzzy queries, and to support > working in "AND" scenarios that are not processed by the min-should-match > DisMax QParser. This was not in Solr already because DisMax was only used for > a very limited syntax that didn't use those features. In my opinion, this > makes a more suitable base parser for general use because unlike the > Lucene/Solr parser, this one supports multiple default fields whereas other > ones (say Yonik's {!prefix} one for example, can't do dismax). The notion of > a single default field is antiquated and a technical under-the-hood detail of > Lucene that I think Solr should shield the user from by on-the-fly using a > DisMax when multiple fields are used. > (patch to be attached soon) -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.