If it's worth the effort to you, you could write a custom scorer that "somehow" pulled these terms out and did what you require. I suppose some kind of clever function query might work, but again probably custom.
Frankly, though, I wouldn't go there until I'd exhausted either my resources or my user's patience. In the worst case, you could break it up into N sub-queries and sort the results in the app. Best, Erick On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Webster Homer <webster.ho...@sial.com> wrote: > Thank you, Erick. > > That is exactly what I thought. Indeed, we don't care about solr's scoring, > as I said we do care about the order of the terms be maintained, hence the > requirement for boosting the term values. > > > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> bq: Can I boost the Terms in the terms query >> >> I'm pretty sure you can't. But how many of these do you have? You can >> always increase the maxBooleanClauses limit in solrconfig.xml. It's >> primarily there to say "having this many clauses is usually a bad >> idea, so proceed with caution". I've seen 10,000 and higher be used >> before, you're really only limited by memory. >> >> And I'm going to guess that your application doesn't have a high query >> rate, so you can likely make maxBooleanClauses be very high. >> >> Basically, the code that TermsQuerParser uses bypasses scoring on the >> theory that these vary large OR clauses are usually useless for >> scoring, your application is an outlier. But you knew that already ;) >> >> >> Best, >> Erick >> >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Webster Homer <webster.ho...@sial.com> >> wrote: >> > I have an application which currently uses a boolean query. The query >> could >> > have a large number of boolean terms. I know that the TermsQuery doesn't >> > have the same limitations as the boolean query. However I need to >> maintain >> > the order of the original terms. >> > >> > The query terms from the boolean query are actually values returned by a >> > chemical structure search, which are returned in order of their relevancy >> > in the structure search. I maintain the order by giving them a boost >> which >> > is a function of the relevancy from the structure search. >> > >> > structure_id:(12345^800 OR 12356^750 OR abcde^600 ... >> > >> > This approach gives me the results in the order I need them in. I'd love >> to >> > use the TermsQuery instead as it doesn't have the same limitations. >> > >> > Can I boost the Terms in the terms query? Is there a way to order the >> > results? e.g. would the results be returned in the same order I specified >> > the terms? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > -- >> > >> > >> > This message and any attachment are confidential and may be privileged or >> > otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended >> recipient, >> > you must not copy this message or attachment or disclose the contents to >> > any other person. If you have received this transmission in error, please >> > notify the sender immediately and delete the message and any attachment >> > from your system. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and any of its >> > subsidiaries do not accept liability for any omissions or errors in this >> > message which may arise as a result of E-Mail-transmission or for damages >> > resulting from any unauthorized changes of the content of this message >> and >> > any attachment thereto. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and any of its >> > subsidiaries do not guarantee that this message is free of viruses and >> does >> > not accept liability for any damages caused by any virus transmitted >> > therewith. >> > >> > Click http://www.emdgroup.com/disclaimer to access the German, French, >> > Spanish and Portuguese versions of this disclaimer. >> > > -- > > > This message and any attachment are confidential and may be privileged or > otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, > you must not copy this message or attachment or disclose the contents to > any other person. If you have received this transmission in error, please > notify the sender immediately and delete the message and any attachment > from your system. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and any of its > subsidiaries do not accept liability for any omissions or errors in this > message which may arise as a result of E-Mail-transmission or for damages > resulting from any unauthorized changes of the content of this message and > any attachment thereto. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and any of its > subsidiaries do not guarantee that this message is free of viruses and does > not accept liability for any damages caused by any virus transmitted > therewith. > > Click http://www.emdgroup.com/disclaimer to access the German, French, > Spanish and Portuguese versions of this disclaimer.
