Hi,
the use case we have in mind is that we would like to achieve exact matches for
explicit phrases. Our users expect that an explicit phrase not only considers
the order of terms, but also the exact wording. Therefore if we search on
fields using a data type that is not meant performing exact matches, we need to
change that for explicit phrases. This means in a usual query we have qf
default fields using advanced tokenization (for query processing and indexing),
for example like stemming via SnowballPorterFilterFactory. So our idea was to
change the default search fields for explicit phrases to achieve exact matches,
by using a simple data format like for example “string“ (StrField, without
advanced options).
Extending our example from the last mail:
qf="title text"
Datatype of title, text, something like “text_advanced”:
<fieldtype ...
<analyzer type="index"> <!--(and also <analyzer type="query"> )-->
<filter class="solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory" ...>
<filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory" />
<filter class="solr.SnowballPorterFilterFactory" language="German2" />
...
Data type of the additional fields titleExact, textExact:
<fieldType name="string" class="solr.StrField" sortMissingLast="true"
omitNorms="true"/>
q="ran away from home" Cat Dog
-transformTo->
q=( titleExact:"ran away from home" OR textExact:"ran away from home" ) Cat Dog.
Regards,
Richard.
BINSERV
Gesellschaft für interaktive Konzepte und neue Medien mbH
Software Engineer
Gotenstr. 7-9
53175 Bonn
Tel.: +49 (0)228 / 4 22 86 - 38
Fax.: +49 (0)228 / 4 22 86 - 538
E-Mail: r.tant...@binserv.de
Web: www.binserv.de
www.binforcepro.de
Geschäftsführer: Rüdiger Jakob
Amtsgericht: Siegburg HRB 6765
Hauptsitz der Gesellschaft.: Pfarrer-Wichert-Str. 35, 53639 Königswinter
Diese E-Mail einschließlich eventuell angehängter Dateien enthält vertrauliche
und/oder rechtlich geschützte Informationen. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige
Adressat sind und diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, dürfen Sie weder den
Inhalt dieser E-Mail nutzen noch dürfen Sie die eventuell angehängten Dateien
öffnen und auch nichts kopieren oder weitergeben/verbreiten. Bitte verständigen
Sie den Absender und löschen Sie diese E-Mail und eventuell angehängte Dateien
umgehend. Vielen Dank!
----- Original message -----
Von: Jack Krupansky [mailto:j...@basetechnology.com]
Gesendet: Freitag, 30. November 2012 23:04
An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Edismax query parser and phrase queries
I don’t have a simple answer for your stated issue, but maybe part of that is
because I’m not so sure what the exact problem/goal is. I mean, what’s so
special about phrase queries for your app than they need distinct processing
from individual terms?
And, ultimately, what goal are you trying to achieve? Such as, how will the
outcome of the query affect what users see and do.
-- Jack Krupansky
From: Tantius, Richard
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 8:44 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Edismax query parser and phrase queries
Hi,
we are using the edismax query parser and execute queries on specific fields by
using the qf option. Like others, we are facing the problem we do not want
explicit phrase queries to be performed on some of the qf fields and also
require additional search fields for those kind of queries.
We tried to expand explicit phrases in a query by implementing some
pre-processing logic, which did not seemed to be quite convenient.
So for example (lets assume qf="title text", we want phrase queries to be
performed on the additional fields "titleAlt textAlt" ): q="ran away from home"
Cat Dog -transformTo-> q=( titleAlt:"ran away from home" OR textAlt:"ran away
from home" ) Cat Dog. Unfortunately this gets rather complicated if logic
operators are involved within the query. Is there some kind of best practice,
should we for example extend the query parser, or stick to our pre-processing
approach?
Regards,
Richard.
