David Smiley commented on SOLR-5163:

I've been bitten by this a several times.  It can be nasty since a typo in your 
"qf" won't necessarily be noticed right away -- no error, just bad search 
results for certain queries that use operators.  It might not even be a typo 
but the schema being out of sync.  I suspect the fix will need to be careful to 
throw an exception for "qf" errors only while not throwing an exception if the 
user's query appears it might refer to a field.  Probably the easiest/safest 
way to do this is validate "qf" up front.  Clearly needs a test.

> edismax gobbles exceptions for unrelated issues
> -----------------------------------------------
>                 Key: SOLR-5163
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5163
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: query parsers, search
>            Reporter: Steven Bower
>            Priority: Major
> query:
> q=foo AND bar
> qf=field1
> qf=field2
> defType=edismax
> Where field1 exists and field2 doesn't..
> will treat the AND as a term vs and operator

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

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

Reply via email to