Thanks for your answer! I didn't realize this what not supposed to be done (conjunction of DirectSolrSpellChecker and FileBasedSpellChecker). I got this idea in the mailing list while searching for a solution to get a list of words to ignore for the DirectSolrSpellChecker.
Well well well, I'll try removing the check and see what happens. I'm not a java programmer, but if I can find a simple solution I'll let you know. Thanks again, Elisabeth 2015-04-14 16:29 GMT+02:00 Dyer, James <james.d...@ingramcontent.com>: > Elisabeth, > > Currently ConjunctionSolrSpellChecker only supports adding > WordBreakSolrSpellchecker to IndexBased- FileBased- or > DirectSolrSpellChecker. In the future, it would be great if it could > handle other Spell Checker combinations. For instance, if you had a > (e)dismax query that searches multiple fields, to have a separate > spellchecker for each of them. > > But CSSC is not hardened for this more general usage, as hinted in the API > doc. The check done to ensure all spellcheckers use the same > stringdistance object, I believe, is a safeguard against using this class > for functionality it is not able to correctly support. It looks to me that > SOLR-6271 was opened to fix the bug in that it is comparing references on > the stringdistance. This is not a problem with WBSSC because this one does > not support string distance at all. > > What you're hoping for, however, is that the requirement for the string > distances be the same to be removed entirely. You could try modifying the > code by removing the check. However beware that you might not get the > results you desire! But should this happen, please, go ahead and fix it > for your use case and then donate the code. This is something I've > personally wanted for a long time. > > James Dyer > Ingram Content Group > > > -----Original Message----- > From: elisabeth benoit [mailto:elisaelisael...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 7:37 AM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: using DirectSpellChecker and FileBasedSpellChecker with Solr > 4.10.1 > > Hello, > > I am using Solr 4.10.1 and trying to use DirectSolrSpellChecker and > FileBasedSpellchecker in same request. > > I've applied change from patch 135.patch (cf Solr-6271). I've tried running > the command "patch -p1 -i 135.patch --dry-run" but it didn't work, maybe > because the patch was a fix to Solr 4.9, so I just replaced line in > ConjunctionSolrSpellChecker > > else if (!stringDistance.equals(checker.getStringDistance())) { > throw new IllegalArgumentException( > "All checkers need to use the same StringDistance."); > } > > > by > > else if (!stringDistance.equals(checker.getStringDistance())) { > throw new IllegalArgumentException( > "All checkers need to use the same StringDistance!!! 1:" + > checker.getStringDistance() + " 2: " + stringDistance); > } > > as it was done in the patch > > but still, when I send a spellcheck request, I get the error > > msg": "All checkers need to use the same StringDistance!!! > 1:org.apache.lucene.search.spell.LuceneLevenshteinDistance@15f57db32: > org.apache.lucene.search.spell.LuceneLevenshteinDistance@280f7e08" > > From error message I gather both spellchecker use same distanceMeasure > LuceneLevenshteinDistance, but they're not same instance of > LuceneLevenshteinDistance. > > Is the condition all right? What should be done to fix this properly? > > Thanks, > Elisabeth >
