It has been in the wiki, more or less.  See 
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpellCheckComponent#spellcheck.count and following 
sections.

James Dyer
Ingram Content Group
(615) 213-4311


-----Original Message-----
From: Shalin Shekhar Mangar [mailto:shalinman...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 12:41 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Why do FQs make my spelling suggestions so slow?

James, this is very useful information. Can you please add this to the wiki?


On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Dyer, James
<james.d...@ingramcontent.com>wrote:

> Instead of "maxCollationTries=0", use a value greater than zero.  Zero
> means not to check if the collation will return hits.  1 means to test 1
> possible combination against the index and return it only if it returns
> hits.  2 tries up to 2 possibilities, etc.  As you have
> "spellcheck.maxCollations=8", you'll probably want maxCollationTries at
> least that large.  Maybe 10-20 would be better.  Make it as low as possible
> to get generally good results, or as high as possible before the
> performance on a query with many misspelled words gets too bad.
>
> Also, use a spellcheck.count greater than 2.  This is as many corrections
> per misspelled term you want it to consider.  If using
> DirectSolrSpellChecker, you can have it set low, 5-10 might be good.  If
> using IndexBased- or FileBased spell checkers, use at least 10.
>
> Also, do not use "onlyMorePopular" unless you indeed want every term in
> the user's query to be replaced with higher-frequency terms (even
> correctly-spelled terms get replaced).  If you want it to suggest even for
> words that are in the dictionary, try "spellcheck.alternativeTermCount"
> instead.  Try setting it to about half of "spellcheck.count" (but at least
> 10 if using IndexBased- or FileBased spell checkers).
>
> James Dyer
> Ingram Content Group
> (615) 213-4311
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicholas Fellows [mailto:n...@djdownload.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:06 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Why do FQs make my spelling suggestions so slow?
>
> I also have problems getting the solrspellchecker to utilise existing FQ
> params correctly.
> we have some fairly monster queries
>
> eg : http://pastebin.com/4XzGpfeC
>
> I cannot seem to get our FQ parameters to be honored when generating
> results.
> In essence i am getting collations that yield no results when the filter
> query is applied.
>
> We have items that are by default not shown when out of stock or
> forthcoming. the user
> can select whether to show these or not.
>
> Is there something wrong with my query or perhaps my use case is not
> supported?
>
> Im using nested query and local params etc
>
> Would very much appreciate some assistance on this one as 2days worth of
> hacking, and pestering
> people on IRC have not yet yeilded a solution for me. Im not even sure what
> i am trying
> is even possible! Some sort of clarification on this would really help!
>
> Cheers
>
> Nick...
>
>
>
>
> On 29 May 2013 15:57, Andy Lester <a...@petdance.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > On May 29, 2013, at 9:46 AM, "Dyer, James" <james.d...@ingramcontent.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Just an instanity check, I see I had misspelled "maxCollations" as
> > "maxCollation" in my prior response.  When you tested with this set the
> > same as "maxCollationTries", did you correct my spelling?
> >
> > Yes, definitely.
> >
> > Thanks for the ticket.  I am looking at the effects of turning on
> > spellcheck.onlyMorePopular to true, which reduces the number of
> collations
> > it seems to do, but doesn't affect the underlying question of "is the
> > spellchecker doing FQs properly?"
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Andy
> >
> > --
> > Andy Lester => a...@petdance.com => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Nick Fellows
> DJdownload.com
> -----------------------------------
> 10 Greenland Street
> London
> NW10ND
> United Kingdom
> -----------------------------------
> n...@djdownload.com (E)
>
> -----------------------------------
> www.djdownload.com
>
>


-- 
Regards,
Shalin Shekhar Mangar.

Reply via email to