I think a general feature along the lines I discussed would permit *all* of the 
scenarios to be dealt with effectively.
Very good - I'll create a feature, ticket, and patch, and link to your ticket 
as well. ;-)

Thanks,
Karl

________________________________________
From: ext Koji Sekiguchi [[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 7:34 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: What is the best way in Solr to perform iterative search?

I have a similar requirement:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1878

Koji

--
http://www.rondhuit.com/en/



(10/08/04 4:41), [email protected] wrote:
> Oops - I meant the "process()" method, not "prepare()", below.
>
> Looking at the code, it occurs to me that ideally such sequences of queries 
> ought to have their own supporting infrastructure within Solr, because doing 
> two queries inside a search component's process() method basically defeats 
> query distribution and other nice solr features.  The only thing that 
> prevents you from doing such a thing at the SearchHandler level is the lack 
> of ability for any given query in a sequence from seeing the results of any 
> previous query(s) - there's simply no way to pass that info around at 
> present.  So probably the request object would need an additional hash map or 
> some such, to allow such information transfer, and the search handler 
> configuration would need to include a named and ordered set of individual 
> query component lists.  Does anyone have any interest in such a feature?
>
> Karl
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wright Karl (Nokia-MS/Cambridge)
> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 1:16 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: What is the best way in Solr to perform iterative search?
>
> Thanks - I've got the latter situation, actually.
>
> I presume when you wrote your QueryComponent you did the query first 
> execution, modification, and second execution all within the equivalent of 
> the prepare() method?  I didn't want to replace QueryComponent itself, since 
> it does a fair bit of stuff, but maybe I can extend it and just override the 
> appropriate method...
>
> Karl
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Erik Hatcher [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 1:01 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: What is the best way in Solr to perform iterative search?
>
> I'm not quite clear on what you want ... if you want to "search within
> previous search results", simply take the original query and turn it
> into an fq parameter for the next request using the new query as the q
> parameter.
>
> If you want to take some part of the current results to form a new
> query internally to Solr, it sounds like what you want is a custom
> QueryComponent.  I've done this, for example, to back off a search
> that had zero results and broaden it automatically.  Register a new
> QueryComponent as "query" and it'll replace the existing one - in
> solrconfig.xml.
>
>       Erik
>
>
> On Aug 3, 2010, at 12:18 PM,<[email protected]>  <[email protected]
>   >  wrote:
>
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I have a search task which needs to do the following:
>>
>>      * Do a search
>>      * Use the results of that search to form a final query, which when
>> executed returns the overall results
>>
>> The question is, what is the best way to build components within
>> Solr to handle this request flow?  My first thought was to construct
>> two QParserPlugin objects, one for each query, and then perhaps
>> write a custom version of QueryComponent that does the job.   But I
>> certainly can't put all the above logic into one SearchComponent,
>> because of the requirement that I need the results from one search
>> to do the subsequent one.  I *could* replace or extend the
>> requestHandler instead.  Or, I could have multiple SearchComponent's
>> in the pipeline where one looks at the other's results (will this
>> work???)  Any other ideas?
>>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to