yes. I know it's been done by other users, but haven't done it myself... Best Erick
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Isan Fulia <isan.fu...@germinait.com>wrote: > Hi all, > I am currently using solr1.4.1 .Do I need to apply patch for extended > dismax parser. > > On 28 January 2011 03:42, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > In general, patches are applied to the source tree and it's re-compiled. > > See: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToContribute#Working_With_Patches > > > > This is pretty easy, and I do know that "some people" have applied the > > eDismax > > patch to the 1.4 code line, but I haven't done it myself. > > > > Best > > Erick > > > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Jonathan Rochkind <rochk...@jhu.edu > > >wrote: > > > > > Yes, I think nested queries are the only way to do that, and yes, > nested > > > queries like Daniel's example work (I've done it myself). I haven't > > really > > > tried to get into understanding/demonstrating _exactly_ how the > relevance > > > ends up working on the overall master query in such a situation, but it > > sort > > > of works. > > > > > > (Just note that Daniel's example isn't quite right, I think you need > > double > > > quotes for the nested _query_, just check the wiki page/blog post on > > nested > > > queries). > > > > > > Does eDismax handle parens for order of operation too? If so, eDismax > is > > > probably the best/easiest solution, especially if you're trying to > parse > > an > > > incoming query from some OTHER format and translate it to something > that > > can > > > be sent to Solr, which is what I often do. > > > > > > I haven't messed with eDismax myself yet. Does anyone know if there's > > any > > > easy (easy!) way to get eDismax in a Solr 1.4? Any easy way to compile > > an > > > eDismax query parser on it's own that works with Solr 1.4, and then > just > > > drop it into your local lib/ for use with an existing Solr 1.4? > > > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: Daniel Pötzinger [daniel.poetzin...@aoemedia.de] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 9:26 AM > > > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > > > Subject: AW: DismaxParser Query > > > > > > It may also be an option to mix the query parsers? > > > Something like this (not tested): > > > > > > q={!lucene}field1:test OR field2:test2 _query_:{!dismax qf=fields}+my > > > dismax -bad > > > > > > So you have the benefits of lucene and dismax parser > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > > Von: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com] > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 27. Januar 2011 15:15 > > > An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > > > Betreff: Re: DismaxParser Query > > > > > > What version of Solr are you using, and could you consider either 3x or > > > applying a patch to 1.4.1? Because eDismax (extended dismax) handles > the > > > full Lucene query language and probably works here. See the Solr > > > JIRA 1553 at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1553 > > > > > > Best > > > Erick > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Isan Fulia <isan.fu...@germinait.com > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > It worked by making mm=0 (it acted as OR operator) > > > > but how to handle this > > > > > > > > field1:((keyword1 AND keyword2) OR (keyword3 AND keyword4)) OR > > > > field2:((keyword1 AND keyword2) OR (keyword3 AND keyword4)) OR > > > > field3:((keyword1 AND keyword2) OR (keyword3 AND keyword4)) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 27 January 2011 17:06, lee carroll <lee.a.carr...@googlemail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > sorry ignore that - we are on dismax here - look at mm param in the > > > docs > > > > > you can set this to achieve what you need > > > > > > > > > > On 27 January 2011 11:34, lee carroll < > lee.a.carr...@googlemail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > the default operation can be set in your config to be "or" or on > > the > > > > > query > > > > > > something like q.op=OR > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 27 January 2011 11:26, Isan Fulia <isan.fu...@germinait.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> but q="keyword1 keyword2" does AND operation not OR > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On 27 January 2011 16:22, lee carroll < > > lee.a.carr...@googlemail.com > > > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > use dismax q for first three fields and a filter query for the > > 4th > > > > and > > > > > >> 5th > > > > > >> > fields > > > > > >> > so > > > > > >> > q="keyword1 keyword 2" > > > > > >> > qf = field1,feild2,field3 > > > > > >> > pf = field1,feild2,field3 > > > > > >> > mm=something sensible for you > > > > > >> > defType=dismax > > > > > >> > fq=" field4:(keyword3 OR keyword4) AND field5:(keyword5)" > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > take a look at the dismax docs for extra params > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > On 27 January 2011 08:52, Isan Fulia < > isan.fu...@germinait.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Hi all, > > > > > >> > > The query for standard request handler is as follows > > > > > >> > > field1:(keyword1 OR keyword2) OR field2:(keyword1 OR > keyword2) > > > OR > > > > > >> > > field3:(keyword1 OR keyword2) AND field4:(keyword3 OR > > keyword4) > > > > AND > > > > > >> > > field5:(keyword5) > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > How the same above query can be written for dismax request > > > handler > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > -- > > > > > >> > > Thanks & Regards, > > > > > >> > > Isan Fulia. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> -- > > > > > >> Thanks & Regards, > > > > > >> Isan Fulia. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Thanks & Regards, > > > > Isan Fulia. > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Thanks & Regards, > Isan Fulia. >
