[
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.
