Hi Tim, 2014-03-07 15:20 GMT+01:00 Allison, Timothy B. <[email protected]>:
> Tommaso, > > Ah, now I see. If you want to add new operators, you'll have to modify > the javacc files. For the SpanQueryParser, I added a handful of new > operators and chose to go with regexes instead of javacc...not sure that was > the right decision, but given my lack of knowledge of javacc, it was > expedient. If you have time or already know javacc, it shouldn't be > difficult. > thanks, I've used javacc in the past, but I'm definitely not experienced with it, I'll see what fits best. > As for nobrainer on the Solr side, y, it shouldn't be a problem. > However, as of now the basic queryparser is a copy and paste job between > Lucene and Solr, so you'll just have to redo your code in Solr....unless you > do something smarter. > uh ok, that seems to be something to fix though, don't know if there're specific reasons for copy pasting instead of reusing... > If you'd be willing to wait for LUCENE-5205 to be brought into Lucene, > I'd consider adding this functionality into the SpanQueryParser as a later > step. > cool, thanks Tim, that'd be really nice. Thanks, Tommaso > > > Cheers, > > > > Tim > > > > *From:* Tommaso Teofili [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Friday, March 07, 2014 3:17 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Suggestions about writing / extending QueryParsers > > > > Thanks Tim and Upayavira for your replies. > > > > I still need to decide what the final syntax could be, however generally > speaking the ideal would be that I am able to extend the current Lucene > syntax with a new expression which will trigger the creation of a more like > this query with something like +title:foo +"text for similar docs"%2 where > the phrase between quotes will generate a MoreLikeThisQuery on that text if > it's followed by the % character (and the number 2 may control the MLT > configuration, e.g. min document freq == min term freq = 2), similarly to > what it's done for proximity search (not sure about using %, it's just a > syntax example). > > I guess then I'd need to extend the classic query parser, as per Tim's > suggestions and I'd assume that if this goes into the classic qp it should > be a no brainer on the Solr side. > > Does it sound correct / feasible? > > > > Regards, > > Tommaso > > 2014-03-06 15:08 GMT+01:00 Upayavira <[email protected]>: > > Tommaso, > > > > Do say more about what you're thinking of. I'm currently getting my dev > environment up to look into enhancing the MoreLikeThisHandler to be able > handle function query boosts. This should be eminently possible from my > initial research. However, if you're thinking of something more powerful, > perhaps we can work together. > > > > Upayavira > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014, at 11:23 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm thinking about writing/extending a QueryParser for MLT queries; I've > never really looked into that code too much, while I'm doing that now, I'm > wondering if anyone has suggestions on how to start with such a topic. > > Should I write a new grammar for that ? Or can I just extend an existing > grammar / class? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > Tommaso > > >
