[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8531?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16650813#comment-16650813
 ] 

Jim Ferenczi commented on LUCENE-8531:
--------------------------------------

(Multi)PhraseQuery-s allows some reordering but the semantic is different from 
an unordered span near query.
I don't think we can respect the slop correctly if we continue to use span 
queries here. We switched to span queries to avoid searching duplicate terms in 
multiple phrase queries but I agree that the behavior is not consistent when 
using a slop. Maybe we could switch to the old method of building one phrase 
query per path if a slop is used ? This way we could apply the slop to each 
phrase query independently. This is more costly than the span method but it 
would be semantically correct. 

> QueryBuilder hard-codes inOrder=true for generated sloppy span near queries
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-8531
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8531
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: core/queryparser
>            Reporter: Steve Rowe
>            Assignee: Steve Rowe
>            Priority: Major
>
> QueryBuilder.analyzeGraphPhrase() generates SpanNearQuery-s with passed-in 
> phraseSlop, but hard-codes inOrder ctor param as true.
> Before multi-term synonym support and graph token streams introduced the 
> possibility of generating SpanNearQuery-s, QueryBuilder generated 
> (Multi)PhraseQuery-s, which always interpret slop as allowing reordering 
> edits.  Solr's eDismax query parser generates phrase queries when its 
> pf/pf2/pf3 params are specified, and when multi-term synonyms are used with a 
> graph-aware synonym filter, SpanNearQuery-s are generated that require 
> clauses to be in order; unlike with (Multi)PhraseQuery-s, reordering edits 
> are not allowed, so this is a kind of regression.  See SOLR-12243 for edismax 
> pf/pf2/pf3 context.  (Note that the patch on SOLR-12243 also addresses 
> another problem that blocks eDismax from generating queries *at all* under 
> the above-described circumstances.)
> I propose adding a new analyzeGraphPhrase() method that allows configuration 
> of inOrder, which would allow eDismax to specify inOrder=false.  The existing 
> analyzeGraphPhrase() method would remain with its hard-coded inOrder=true, so 
> existing client behavior would remain unchanged.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

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

Reply via email to