yep seems that’s the answer. The highlighting is done separately by the rails app, so I’ll look into proper solr highlighting.
thanks a lot for the use of your ears, much improved understanding! cheers, Alistair -- mov eax,1 mov ebx,0 int 80h On 16/06/2015 16:33, "Erick Erickson" <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hmmm. First, highlighting should work here. If you have it configured >to work on the dc.description field. > >As to whether the phrase "management changes" is near enough, I >pretty much guarantee it is. This is where the admin/analysis page can >answer this type of question authoritatively since it's based exactly >on your particular analysis chain. > >Best, >Erick > >On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Alistair Young ><alistair.yo...@uhi.ac.uk> wrote: >> yes prolly not a bug. The highlighting is on but nothing is highlighted. >> Perhaps this text is triggering it? >> >> 'consider the impacts of land management changes’ >> >> that would seem reasonable. It’s not a direct match so no highlighting >> (the highlighting does work on a direct match) but 'management changes’ >> must be near enough ‘manage change’ to trigger a result. >> >> Alistair >> >> -- >> mov eax,1 >> mov ebx,0 >> int 80h >> >> >> >> >> On 16/06/2015 16:18, "Erick Erickson" <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>I agree with Allesandro the behavior you're describing >>>is _not_ correct at all given your description. So either >>> >>>1> There's something "interesting" about your configuration >>> that doesn't seem important that you haven't told us, >>> although what it could be is a mystery to me too ;) >>> >>>2> it's matching on something else. Note that the >>> phrase has been stemmed, so something in there >>> besides management might stem to manag and/or >>> something other than changes might stem to chang >>> and the two of _them_ happen to be next to each >>> other. "are managers changing?" for instance. Or >>> even something less likely. Perhaps turn on >>> highlighting and see if it pops out? >>> >>> >>>3> you've uncovered a bug. Although I suspect others >>> would have reported it and the unit tests would have >>> barfed all over the place. >>> >>>One other thing you can do. Go to the admin/analysis >>>page and turn on the "verbose" check box. Put >>>management is undergoing many changes >>>in both the query and index boxes. The result (it's >>>kind of hard to read I'll admit) will include the position >>>of each token after all the analysis is done. Phrase >>>queries (without slop) should only be matching adjacent >>>positions. So the question is whether the position info >>>"looks correct".... >>> >>>Best, >>>Erick >>> >>>On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 4:40 AM, Alessandro Benedetti >>><benedetti.ale...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> According to your debug you are using a default Lucene Query Parser. >>>> This surprise me as i would expect with that query a match with >>>>distance 0 >>>> between the 2 terms . >>>> >>>> Are you sure nothing else is that field that matches the phrase query >>>>? >>>> >>>> From the documentation >>>> >>>> "Lucene supports finding words are a within a specific distance away. >>>>To do >>>> a proximity search use the tilde, "~", symbol at the end of a Phrase. >>>>For >>>> example to search for a "apache" and "jakarta" within 10 words of each >>>> other in a document use the search: >>>> >>>> "jakarta apache"~10 " >>>> >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> >>>> 2015-06-16 11:33 GMT+01:00 Alistair Young <alistair.yo...@uhi.ac.uk>: >>>> >>>>> it¹s a useful behaviour. I¹d just like to understand where it¹s >>>>>deciding >>>>> the document is relevant. debug output is: >>>>> >>>>> <lst name="debug"> >>>>> <str name="rawquerystring">dc.description:"manage change"</str> >>>>> <str name="querystring">dc.description:"manage change"</str> >>>>> <str name="parsedquery">PhraseQuery(dc.description:"manag >>>>>chang")</str> >>>>> <str name="parsedquery_toString">dc.description:"manag chang"</str> >>>>> <lst name="explain"> >>>>> <str name="tst:test"> >>>>> 1.2008798 = (MATCH) weight(dc.description:"manag chang" in 221) >>>>> [DefaultSimilarity], result of: >>>>> 1.2008798 = fieldWeight in 221, product of: >>>>> 1.0 = tf(freq=1.0), with freq of: >>>>> 1.0 = phraseFreq=1.0 >>>>> 9.6070385 = idf(), sum of: >>>>> 4.0365543 = idf(docFreq=101, maxDocs=2125) >>>>> 5.5704846 = idf(docFreq=21, maxDocs=2125) >>>>> 0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=221) >>>>> </str> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <str name="QParser">LuceneQParser</str> >>>>> <lst name="timing"> >>>>> <double name="time">41.0</double> >>>>> <lst name="prepare"> >>>>> <double name="time">3.0</double> >>>>> <lst name="query"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="facet"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="mlt"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="highlight"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="stats"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="debug"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="process"> >>>>> <double name="time">35.0</double> >>>>> <lst name="query"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="facet"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="mlt"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="highlight"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="stats"> >>>>> <double name="time">0.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> <lst name="debug"> >>>>> <double name="time">35.0</double> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> </lst> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Alistair >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> mov eax,1 >>>>> mov ebx,0 >>>>> int 80h >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 16/06/2015 11:26, "Alessandro Benedetti" >>>>><benedetti.ale...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >Can you show us how the query is parsed ? >>>>> >You didn't tell us nothing about the query parser you are using. >>>>> >Enable the debugQuery=true will show you how the query is parsed and >>>>>this >>>>> >will be quite useful for us. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >Cheers >>>>> > >>>>> >2015-06-16 11:22 GMT+01:00 Alistair Young >>>>><alistair.yo...@uhi.ac.uk>: >>>>> > >>>>> >> Hiya, >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I've been looking for documentation that would point to where I >>>>>could >>>>> >> modify or explain why 'near neighbours' are returned from a phrase >>>>> >>search. >>>>> >> If I search for: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> "manage change" >>>>> >> >>>>> >> I get back a document that contains "this will help in your >>>>>management >>>>> >>of >>>>> >> <lots more words...> changes". It's relevant but I'd like to >>>>>understand >>>>> >>why >>>>> >> solr is returning it. Is it a combination of fuzzy/slop? The >>>>>distance >>>>> >> between the two variations of the two words in the document is >>>>>quite >>>>> >>large. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> thanks, >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Alistair >>>>> >> >>>>> >> -- >>>>> >> mov eax,1 >>>>> >> mov ebx,0 >>>>> >> int 80h >>>>> >> >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >-- >>>>> >-------------------------- >>>>> > >>>>> >Benedetti Alessandro >>>>> >Visiting card : http://about.me/alessandro_benedetti >>>>> > >>>>> >"Tyger, tyger burning bright >>>>> >In the forests of the night, >>>>> >What immortal hand or eye >>>>> >Could frame thy fearful symmetry?" >>>>> > >>>>> >William Blake - Songs of Experience -1794 England >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> -------------------------- >>>> >>>> Benedetti Alessandro >>>> Visiting card : http://about.me/alessandro_benedetti >>>> >>>> "Tyger, tyger burning bright >>>> In the forests of the night, >>>> What immortal hand or eye >>>> Could frame thy fearful symmetry?" >>>> >>>> William Blake - Songs of Experience -1794 England >>
