[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2010?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12900246#action_12900246
 ] 

Grant Ingersoll commented on SOLR-2010:
---------------------------------------

{quote}Adds support for shards. I originally implemented this by passing the 
SearchHandler to the SpellCheckComponent and then using an overloaded version 
of SearchHandler.handleRequestBody() to do the re-queries. I found this was 
unnecessary as we get the same results by calling the QueryComponent directly. 
{quote}

I haven't taken a look at the patch yet, but by the sounds of it, I still think 
the cleaner way to go is to make Solr have an option to specifically pass in 
which component to run and turn off all others.  This would be useful for other 
things, too.  Then you could just use the existing mechanisms.

> Improvements to SpellCheckComponent Collate functionality
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-2010
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2010
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: clients - java, spellchecker
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.1
>         Environment: Tested against trunk revision 966633
>            Reporter: James Dyer
>            Assignee: Grant Ingersoll
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: SOLR-2010.patch, SOLR-2010.patch, SOLR-2010.txt
>
>
> Improvements to SpellCheckComponent Collate functionality
> Our project requires a better Spell Check Collator.  I'm contributing this as 
> a patch to get suggestions for improvements and in case there is a broader 
> need for these features.
> 1. Only return collations that are guaranteed to result in hits if re-queried 
> (applying original fq params also).  This is especially helpful when there is 
> more than one correction per query.  The 1.4 behavior does not verify that a 
> particular combination will actually return hits.
> 2. Provide the option to get multiple collation suggestions
> 3. Provide extended collation results including the # of hits re-querying 
> will return and a breakdown of each misspelled word and its correction.
> This patch is similar to what is described in SOLR-507 item #1.  Also, this 
> patch provides a viable workaround for the problem discussed in SOLR-1074.  A 
> dictionary could be created that combines the terms from the multiple fields. 
>  The collator then would prune out any spurious suggestions this would cause.
> This patch adds the following spellcheck parameters:
> 1. spellcheck.maxCollationTries - maximum # of collation possibilities to try 
> before giving up.  Lower values ensure better performance.  Higher values may 
> be necessary to find a collation that can return results.  Default is 0, 
> which maintains backwards-compatible behavior (do not check collations).
> 2. spellcheck.maxCollations - maximum # of collations to return.  Default is 
> 1, which maintains backwards-compatible behavior.
> 3. spellcheck.collateExtendedResult - if true, returns an expanded response 
> format detailing collations found.  default is false, which maintains 
> backwards-compatible behavior.  When true, output is like this (in context):
> <lst name="spellcheck">
>       <lst name="suggestions">
>               <lst name="hopq">
>                       <int name="numFound">94</int>
>                       <int name="startOffset">7</int>
>                       <int name="endOffset">11</int>
>                       <arr name="suggestion">
>                               <str>hope</str>
>                               <str>how</str>
>                               <str>hope</str>
>                               <str>chops</str>
>                               <str>hoped</str>
>                               etc
>                       </arr>
>               <lst name="faill">
>                       <int name="numFound">100</int>
>                       <int name="startOffset">16</int>
>                       <int name="endOffset">21</int>
>                       <arr name="suggestion">
>                               <str>fall</str>
>                               <str>fails</str>
>                               <str>fail</str>
>                               <str>fill</str>
>                               <str>faith</str>
>                               <str>all</str>
>                               etc
>                       </arr>
>               </lst>
>               <lst name="collation">
>                       <str name="collationQuery">Title:(how AND fails)</str>
>                       <int name="hits">2</int>
>                       <lst name="misspellingsAndCorrections">
>                               <str name="hopq">how</str>
>                               <str name="faill">fails</str>
>                       </lst>
>               </lst>
>               <lst name="collation">
>                       <str name="collationQuery">Title:(hope AND faith)</str>
>                       <int name="hits">2</int>
>                       <lst name="misspellingsAndCorrections">
>                               <str name="hopq">hope</str>
>                               <str name="faill">faith</str>
>                       </lst>
>               </lst>
>               <lst name="collation">
>                       <str name="collationQuery">Title:(chops AND all)</str>
>                       <int name="hits">1</int>
>                       <lst name="misspellingsAndCorrections">
>                               <str name="hopq">chops</str>
>                               <str name="faill">all</str>
>                       </lst>
>               </lst>
>       </lst>
> </lst>
> In addition, SOLRJ is updated to include 
> SpellCheckResponse.getCollatedResults(), which will return the expanded 
> Collation format.  getCollatedResult(), which returns a single String, is 
> retained for backwards-compatibility.  Other APIs were not changed but will 
> still work provided that spellcheck.collateExtendedResult is false.
> This likely will not return valid results if using Shards.  Rather, a more 
> robust interaction with the index would be necessary than what exists in 
> SpellCheckCollator.collate().

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to