On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 2:18 PM, John Seer <pulsph...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> If I understand you guys correct
> If I have term which has n tokens I will need to create n SpanTermQuery put
> them in array and pass it to SpanNearQuery?
Can you post inline instead of top-posting?
What you have is essentially my suggestion, which, with your original
question looks like (with slop 2):
new SpanNearQuery
(new SpanQuery[] {
new SpanTermQuery(new Term("name", "A")),
new SpanTermQuery(new Term("name", "C")),
new SpanTermQuery(new Term("name", "F")) },
2,
true);
If you wanted to still use the QueryParser, Erik was suggesting you
could extend it and override "getFieldQuery" (there's a good example
of this in LIA I think) to, essentially, generate the query above.
--tim
> Erik Hatcher wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Apr 12, 2009, at 8:15 AM, Tim Williams wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 5:56 AM, Erik Hatcher
>>> <e...@ehatchersolutions.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 11, 2009, at 9:11 PM, Tim Williams wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Erick Erickson
>>>>> <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That'll teach me to scan a post. The link I sent you
>>>>>> is still relevant, but wildcards are NOT intended to be used to
>>>>>> concatenate terms. You want a phrase query or a span query
>>>>>> for that. i.e. "A C F"~# where # is the "slop", that is, the number
>>>>>> of other terms allowed to appear between your desired terms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SpanQueries are constructed programmatically, and PhraseQueries
>>>>>> are produced by the parser.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I understand it though, there's no way to use the queryparser to
>>>>> construct an *ordered* phrase query with slop (which is what I think
>>>>> he's after), right? I gather that'd have to be done manually with a
>>>>> SpanNearQuery. I'd love to hear that the query parser has syntax
>>>>> for
>>>>> this though...
>>>>
>>>> QueryParser does not create any SpanQuery's, but one can subclass
>>>> QueryParser and override getFieldQuery() to put in a SpanQuery
>>>> instead of a
>>>> PhraseQuery.
>>>
>>> Thanks Erik, wouldn't this be an all-or-nothing replacement though?
>>> In other words, by creating ordered SpanNearQuery's as the override,
>>> wouldn't he loose the current unordered PhraseQuery+slop
>>> functionality? I haven't seen a way to subclass the QueryParser to
>>> support both (e.g. extend the syntax)?
>>
>> As always, it depends. If the QueryParser subclass has a switch to
>> toggle between SpanNearQuery and PhraseQuery it could controlled by
>> the code which way to go. But yeah, it's not currently possible to
>> extend the syntax of QueryParser with a subclass. There is a nice new
>> open issue with a new query parser implementation that is vastly more
>> flexible - we'll see that come in to Lucene in the near future.
>>
>> Erik
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Sequential-match-query-tp22995240p23026389.html
> Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
