It's a common problem with pure negative query. The most problematic thing
is that it's fixed in %50 cases, keeping users unaware of it.
Let's track it if someone wants to kick tires
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-16247.

On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 8:45 PM Thomas Woodard <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yes, thank you! That produces results.
>
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 12:04 PM Mikhail Khludnev <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Thomas.
> > What if you try childFq=*:* -sku_type_s:25 ?
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 7:16 PM Thomas Woodard <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > This is in 8.11.1. I've got the following (parsed) query that returns
> no
> > > results:
> > > {
> > >       "q":"{!parent tag=top filters=$childFq which=scope_s:parent
> > > v=$childQuery}",
> > >       "json.facet":"{colors:{  domain: { excludeTags:top,
> > > filter:[\"{!filters param=$childFq excludeTags=color v=$childQuery}\",
> > > \"{!child of=scope_s:parent filters=$fq}scope_s:parent\"] },
> type:terms,
> > > field:color_ids_ss, limit:-1, facet:{
> > parentsCount:\"uniqueBlock(_root_)\"
> > > } }}",
> > >       "fl":"id",
> > >       "edisQ":"XXXXX",
> > >       "fq":["available_catalog140002_b:true",
> > >         "{!edismax tag=top qf=\"name_t^6 name_s^10 studio_t^2 series_t
> > > categories_catalog140002_txt ancestor_categories_catalog140002_txt
> > > features_txt selling_points_txt\" pf=\"name_t^6 studio_t^2 series_t^2
> > > categories_catalog140002_txt^2 ancestor_categories_catalog140002_txt^2
> > > features_txt selling_points_txt\" mm=\"2<-1 4<60%\" tie=\"0.1\"
> > > v=$edisQ}"],
> > >       "rows":"28",
> > >       "childFq":["available_catalog140002_b:true",
> > >         "-sku_type_s:25"],
> > >       "childQuery":"scope_s:child"}
> > > }
> > >
> > > If I take out childFq=-sku_type_s:25, it works. If I change it to
> > > childFq=sku_type_s:21, it works. I tried integer fields originally, and
> > > thought that maybe the problem was not being able to negate a filter on
> > an
> > > integer, but changing to string did not fix it. I'm stumped finding an
> > > explanation for this, but I have also found no examples online that
> > combine
> > > real complexity with block join query parsing. Any suggestions on what
> I
> > am
> > > doing wrong?
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sincerely yours
> > Mikhail Khludnev
> >
>


-- 
Sincerely yours
Mikhail Khludnev

Reply via email to