This is all very strange. I guess I only have a few suggestions: > It might be worth getting a copy of Luke. Under th "tools" menu there's a "checkindex" option that may show you something. You can also use Luke to query your index and examine it. That said, Luke uses Lucene, not Solr so I rather expect it to show you that everything's fine...
> Is there any chance at all you have some older jars mixed in? Frankly this is just me resorting to mysticism because that doesn't seem very likely to cause appending &debugQuery=on to change the search results! I'd expect much worse problems. > As you said, re-indexing should fix things up. But there's no reason that I know of that this should be necessary given what you describe. good luck, because I'm stumped! Erick On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Erik Fäßler <erik.faess...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > Oooops, I have to take something back: The index *has* been created with > Lucene 2.9.3! Sorry for confusing that, I am using two different index > versions, the older for productive purposes and the newer for what I am > developing currently. I just checked back with Luke, he acknowledges that > the index used with my Solr instance has format -9 (Lucene 2.9). > So that's not the matter, I guess...still ideas?! ;) > > Am 20.04.2011 10:17, schrieb Erik Fäßler: >> >> Thank you very much for your answers :-) First of all, I just noticed I >> sent the question unintentionally to the Lucene list while it's more of a >> Solr issue. I will answer here all the same to not confuse things. My >> apologies ;) >> >> First to Erick's suggestions. The default field has been "text" for a >> longer time so I did not make a change to that field yesterday but it had >> been this field before already. >> With "not created by Solr" I exactly mean it has been created using Lucene >> directly. This could be an issue indeed as Lucene 2.3.1 has been used to >> create the index, where Solr 1.4.1 uses Lucene 2.9.3. But it seemed to work >> fine so far (but perhaps that's just wrong, I don't know yet). >> >> I tried your hint with appending "&debugQuery=on". Guess what: With that >> appended I get my hits. No kidding, appending the debug option gives my 30 >> document hits, deleting it from my browser's address bar leaves me behind >> with 0 hits (?!). >> Adress bar strings are: >> No hits: >> >> http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=marine&version=2.2&start=0&rows=10&indent=on >> 30 hits: >> >> http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=marine&version=2.2&start=0&rows=10&indent=on&debugQuery=on >> >> Here's the debug output concerning the query: >> >> <str name="rawquerystring">marine</str> >> <str name="querystring">marine</str> >> <str name="parsedquery">text:marine</str> >> <str name="parsedquery_toString">text:marine</str> >> >> Seems fine. This is expected because I already tried the analysis >> interface to check whether the correct terms are searched for. >> Here my schema snippets: >> >> FieldType "text_ws": >> <fieldType name="text_ws" class="solr.TextField" >> positionIncrementGap="100"> >> <analyzer> >> <tokenizer class="solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory"/> >> </analyzer> >> </fieldType> >> (Solr 1.4.1. default) >> >> Field "text": >> <field name="text" type="text_ws" indexed="true" stored="true" >> termVectors="true" termPositions="true" /> >> >> Default search field: >> <defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField> >> >> I guess this also answers the hints given by Lance. Writing this down, I >> get the feeling the first thing I should do is to update my index to match >> the Lucene version used by Solr. This seems to be the most obvious hint (but >> as Luke can handle all version I thought using this index with Solr should >> be fine, too). Although it's really quite strange that appending the debug >> option changes my search results. Oh my, probably I did just miss some basic >> about how to usr Solr ;) >> Your opinion? Changing the index to another Lucene version isn't exactly >> the fastest and easiest thing so I'd like to strike out all other >> possibilities before :) >> >> Best regards, >> >> Erik >> >> >> Am 20.04.2011 01:07, schrieb Lance Norskog: >>> >>> Look at the "text" definition stack. Does it have the same analyzer >>> and filter that you used to make the index, and in the same order? >>> >>> The specific problem is that the "text" field includes a stemmer, and >>> your code probably did not. And so "marine" is stored as, maybe >>> 'marin'. To check this out, look at the 'schema browser' page off the >>> admin page. This will show you all of the indexed terms in each field. >>> Also look at the Analysis page: this lets you see how text is parsed >>> and changed in the analysis stack. >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Erick Erickson<erickerick...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hmmmm, I don't see the problem either. It *sounds* like you don't really >>>> have the default search field defined the way you think you do. Did you >>>> restart >>>> Solr after making that change? >>>> >>>> I'm assuming that when you say "not created by Solr" you mean that it's >>>> created >>>> by Lucene. What version of Lucene and Solr are you using if that's true? >>>> >>>> You can test this by appending "&debugQuery=on" to your query or >>>> checking >>>> the "debug enable" checkbox in the full query interface from the admin >>>> page. >>>> That should show you exactly what is being searched. You might also want >>>> to look at the analysis page for your field and see how your query >>>> is tokenized. >>>> >>>> But, like I said, this looks like it should work. If you can post the >>>> results of >>>> adding&debugQuery=on and your actual<fieldType> definition for >>>> "text_ws" your >>>> <field> declaration for "text" and the<defaultSearchField> from your >>>> schema >>>> that would help. I can't tell you how many times something that's eluded >>>> me >>>> for hours is obvious to someone else :).. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Erick >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Erik Fäßler<erik.faess...@uni-jena.de> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hallo there, >>>>> >>>>> my issue qualifies as newbie question I guess, but I'm really a bit >>>>> confused. I have an index which has not been created by Solr. Perhaps >>>>> that's >>>>> already the point although I fail to see why this should be an issue >>>>> with my >>>>> problem. >>>>> >>>>> I use the admin interface to check which results particular queries >>>>> bring >>>>> in. My index documents have a field "text" which holds the document >>>>> text. >>>>> This text has only been white space tokenized. So in my schema, the >>>>> type for >>>>> this field is "text_ws". My schema says >>>>> "<defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField>". >>>>> >>>>> When I now search for, say, 'marine' (without quotes), I don't get any >>>>> search results. But when I search '"marine"' (that is, embraced by >>>>> double >>>>> quotes) I get my document hits. Alternatively, I can prepend the field >>>>> name: >>>>> 'text:marine' and will also get my results. >>>>> >>>>> Similar with this phrase query: "marine mussels", where "In marine >>>>> mussels >>>>> of the genus" is a text snippet of a document. The phrase "marine >>>>> mussels" >>>>> won't give any hits. Searching for 'text:"marine mussels"' will give me >>>>> the >>>>> exact document containing this text snippet. >>>>> >>>>> I'm sure this has quite a simple explanation but I'm unable to find it >>>>> right >>>>> now ;-) Perhaps you can help with that. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks a lot! >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> Erik >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
