Hi Markus, Here’s what I included in 6.5.1’s CHANGES.txt (as well as on branch_6x and master, so it’ll be included in future releases’ CHANGES.txt too):
----- * SOLR-10423: Disable graph query production via schema configuration <fieldtype ... enableGraphQueries="false">. This fixes broken queries for ShingleFilter-containing query-time analyzers when request param sow=false. (Steve Rowe) ----- -- Steve www.lucidworks.com > On Apr 5, 2017, at 5:43 PM, Markus Jelsma <markus.jel...@openindex.io> wrote: > > Steve - please include a broad description of this feature in the next > CHANGES.txt. I will forget about this thread but need to be reminded of why i > could need it :) > > Thanks, > Markus > > > -----Original message----- >> From:Steve Rowe <sar...@gmail.com> >> Sent: Wednesday 5th April 2017 23:26 >> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Solr Shingle is not working properly in solr 6.5.0 >> >> Aman, >> >> In forthcoming Solr 6.5.1, this problem will be addressed by setting a new >> <fieldtype> option named “enableGraphQueries” to “false". >> >> Your fieldtype will look like this: >> >> ----- >> <fieldType name="cust_shingle" class=“solr.TextField" >> positionIncrementGap=“100” enableGraphQueries=“false”> >> <analyzer> >> <tokenizer class="solr.StandardTokenizerFactory"/> >> <filter class="solr.ShingleFilterFactory" outputUnigrams=“false" >> maxShingleSize="4”/> >> <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory”/> >> </analyzer> >> </fieldType> >> ----- >> >> -- >> Steve >> www.lucidworks.com >> >>> On Apr 4, 2017, at 5:32 PM, Steve Rowe <sar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Aman, >>> >>> I’ve created <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10423> for this >>> problem. >>> >>> -- >>> Steve >>> www.lucidworks.com >>> >>>> On Mar 31, 2017, at 7:34 AM, Aman Deep Singh <amandeep.coo...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Rich, >>>> Query creation is correct only thing what causing the problem is that >>>> Boolean + query while building the lucene query which causing all tokens to >>>> be matched in the document (equivalent of mm=100%) even though I use mm=1 >>>> it was using BOOLEAN + query as >>>> normal query one plus one abc >>>> Lucene query - >>>> +(((+nameShingle:one plus +nameShingle:plus one +nameShingle:one abc)) >>>> ((+nameShingle:one plus +nameShingle:plus one abc)) ((+nameShingle:one plus >>>> one +nameShingle:one abc)) (nameShingle:one plus one abc)) >>>> >>>> Now since my doc contains only one plus one thus -- >>>> one plus ,plus one, one plus one >>>> thus due to Boolean + it was not matching. >>>> Thanks, >>>> Aman Deep Singh >>>> >>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 4:41 PM Rick Leir <rl...@leirtech.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Aman >>>>> Did you try the Admin Analysis tool? It will show you which filters are >>>>> effective at index and query time. It will help you understand why you are >>>>> not getting a mach. >>>>> Cheers -- Rick >>>>> >>>>> On March 31, 2017 2:36:33 AM EDT, Aman Deep Singh < >>>>> amandeep.coo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> I was trying to use the shingle filter but it was not creating the >>>>>> query as >>>>>> desirable. >>>>>> >>>>>> my schema is >>>>>> <fieldType name="cust_shingle" class="solr.TextField" >>>>>> positionIncrementGap= >>>>>> "100"> <analyzer> <tokenizer class="solr.StandardTokenizerFactory"/> >>>>>> <filter >>>>>> class="solr.ShingleFilterFactory" outputUnigrams="false" >>>>>> maxShingleSize="4" >>>>>> /> <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"/> </analyzer> >>>>>> </fieldType> >>>>>> <field name="nameShingle" type="cust_shingle" indexed="true" >>>>>> stored="true"/> >>>>>> >>>>>> my solr query is >>>>>> >>>>> http://localhost:8983/solr/productCollection/select?defType=edismax&debugQuery=true&q=one%20plus%20one%20four&qf=nameShingle&; >>>>>> *sow=false*&wt=xml >>>>>> >>>>>> and it was creating the parsed query as >>>>>> <str name="parsedquery"> >>>>>> (+(DisjunctionMaxQuery(((+nameShingle:one plus +nameShingle:plus one >>>>>> +nameShingle:one four))) DisjunctionMaxQuery(((+nameShingle:one plus >>>>>> +nameShingle:plus one four))) DisjunctionMaxQuery(((+nameShingle:one >>>>>> plus >>>>>> one +nameShingle:one four))) DisjunctionMaxQuery((nameShingle:one plus >>>>>> one >>>>>> four)))~1)/no_coord >>>>>> </str> >>>>>> <str name="parsedquery_toString"> >>>>>> *+((((+nameShingle:one plus +nameShingle:plus one +nameShingle:one >>>>>> four)) >>>>>> ((+nameShingle:one plus +nameShingle:plus one four)) ((+nameShingle:one >>>>>> plus one +nameShingle:one four)) (nameShingle:one plus one four))~1)* >>>>>> </str> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So ideally token creations is perfect but in the query it is using >>>>>> boolean + operator which is causing the problem as if i have a document >>>>>> with name as >>>>>> "one plus one" ,according to the shingles it has to matched as its >>>>>> token >>>>>> will be ("one plus","one plus one","plus one") . >>>>>> I have tried using the q.op and played around the mm also but nothing >>>>>> is >>>>>> giving me the correct response. >>>>>> Any idea how i can fetch that document even if the document is missing >>>>>> any >>>>>> token. >>>>>> >>>>>> My expected response will be getting the document >>>>>> "one plus one" even the user query has any additional term like "one >>>>>> plus >>>>>> one two" and so on. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Aman Deep Singh >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >>> >> >>
