Does the random sort function help you here?
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/api/org/apache/solr/schema/RandomSortField.html
However, you will get some very old listings then, if it's okay for you.
-Kuli
Am 12.01.2012 14:38, schrieb Alexandre Rocco:
Erick,
This document already has a field that indicates the source (site).
The issue we are trying to solve is when we list all documents without any
specific criteria. Since we bring the most recent ones and the ones that
contains images, we end up having a lot of listings from a single site,
since the documents are indexed in batches from the same site. At some
point we have several documents from the same site in the same date/time
and having images. I'm trying to give some random aspect to this search so
other documents can also appear in between that big dataset from the same
source.
Does the grouping help to achieve this?
Alexandre
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:31 AM, Erick Erickson<erickerick...@gmail.com>wrote:
Alexandre:
Have you thought about grouping? If you can analyze the incoming
documents and include a field such that "similar" documents map
to the same value, than group on that value you'll get output that
isn't dominated by repeated copies of the "similar" documents. It
depends, though, on being able to do a suitable mapping.
In your case, could the mapping just be the site from which you
got the data?
Best
Erick
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Alexandre Rocco<alel...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Erick,
Probably I really written something silly. You are right on either
sorting
by field or ranking.
I just need to change the ranking to shift things around as you said.
To clarify the use case:
We have a listing aggregator that gets product listings from a lot of
different sites and since they are added in batches, sometimes you see a
lot of pages from the same source (site). We are working on some changes
to
shift things around and reduce this "blocking" effect, so we can present
mixed sources on the result pages.
I guess I will start with the document random field and later try to
develop a custom plugin to make things better.
Thanks for the pointers.
Regards,
Alexandre
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Erick Erickson<erickerick...@gmail.com
wrote:
I really don't understand what this means:
"random sorting for the records but also preserving the ranking"
Either you're sorting on rank or you're not. If you mean you're
trying to shift things around just a little bit, *mostly* respecting
relevance then I guess you can do what you're thinking.
You could create your own function query to do the boosting, see:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPlugins#ValueSourceParser
which would keep you from having to re-index your data to get
a different "randomness".
You could also consider external file fields, but I think your
own function query would be cleaner. I don't think math.random
is a supported function OOB
Best
Erick
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Alexandre Rocco<alel...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hello all,
Recently i've been trying to tweak some aspects of relevancy in one
listing
project.
I need to give a higher score to newer documents and also boost the
document based on a boolean field that indicates the listing has
pictures.
On top of that, in some situations we need a random sorting for the
records
but also preserving the ranking.
I tried to combine some techniques described in the Solr Relevancy FAQ
wiki, but when I add the random sorting, the ranking gets messy (as
expected).
This works well:
http://localhost:18979/solr/select/?start=0&rows=15&q={!boost%20b=recip(ms(NOW/HOUR,date_updated),3.16e-11,1,1)}active%3a%22true%22+AND+featured%3a%22false%22+_val_:%haspicture%22&fl=*,score
This does not work, gives a random order on what is already ranked
http://localhost:18979/solr/select/?start=0&rows=15&q={!boost%20b=recip(ms(NOW/HOUR,date_updated),3.16e-11,1,1)}active%3a%22true%22+AND+featured%3a%22false%22+_val_:%haspicture%22&fl=*,score&sort=random_1+desc
The only way I see is to create another field on the schema
containing a
random value and use it to boost the document the same way that was
tone
on
the boolean field.
Anyone tried something like this before and knows some way to get it
working?
Thanks,
Alexandre
