Re: -field1:value1 OR field2:value2

[Shawn Heisey]

On 9/26/2016 3:56 AM, Sandeep Khanzode wrote:
> Hi Alex, It seems that this is not an issue with AND clause. For
> example, if I do ... field1:value1 AND -field2:value2  ... the results
> seem to be an intersection of both. Is this an issue with OR? Which is
> which we replace it with an implicit (*:* NOT)?

This is a fairly common issue that users run into.  I just created a
wiki page to explain the situation.  Consider it a starting point that
can be refined by additional edits:

https://wiki.apache.org/solr/NegativeQueryProblems

Thanks,
Shawn

Re: -field1:value1 OR field2:value2

[Sandeep Khanzode]

Sure. Noted. 
Thanks for the link ...  SRK 

On Monday, September 26, 2016 8:29 PM, Erick Erickson 
 wrote:
 

 Please do not cross post to multiple lists, it's considered bad
etiquette.

Solr does not implement strict boolean logic, please read:

https://lucidworks.com/blog/2011/12/28/why-not-and-or-and-not/

Best,
Erick

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 2:58 AM, Alexandre Rafalovitch
 wrote:
> I don't remember specifically :-(. Search the archives
> http://search-lucene.com/ or follow-up on Solr Users list. Remember to
> mention the version of Solr, as there were some bugs/features/fixes
> with OR, I think.
>
> Regards,
>  Alex.
> 
> Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates:
> http://www.solr-start.com/
>
>
> On 26 September 2016 at 16:56, Sandeep Khanzode
>  wrote:
>> Hi Alex,
>> It seems that this is not an issue with AND clause. For example, if I do ...
>> field1:value1 AND -field2:value2
>> ... the results seem to be an intersection of both.
>> Is this an issue with OR? Which is which we replace it with an implicit (*:* 
>> NOT)? SRK
>>
>>    On Monday, September 26, 2016 3:09 PM, Sandeep Khanzode 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>  Yup. That works. So does (*:* NOT ...)
>> Thanks, Alex.  SRK
>>
>>    On Monday, September 26, 2016 3:03 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>  Try field2:value2 OR (*:* -field1=value1)
>>
>> There is a magic in negative query syntax that breaks down when it
>> gets more complex. It's been discussed on the mailing list a bunch of
>> times, though the discussions are hard to find by title.
>>
>> Regards,
>>    Alex.
>> 
>> Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates:
>> http://www.solr-start.com/
>>
>>
>> On 26 September 2016 at 16:06, Sandeep Khanzode
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> If I query for
>>> -field1=value1 ... I get, say, 100 records
>>> and if I query for
>>> field2:value2 ... I may get 200 records
>>>
>>> I would assume that if I query for
>>> -field1:value1 OR field2:value2
>>>
>>> ... I should get atleast 100 records (assuming they overlap, if not, upto 
>>> 300 records). I am assuming that the default joining is OR.
>>>  But I do not ...
>>> The result is that I get less than 100. If I didn't know better, I would 
>>> have said that an AND is being done.
>>>
>>> I am expecting records that EITHER do NOT contain field1:value1 OR which 
>>> contain field2:value2.
>>>
>>> Please let me know what I am missing. Thanks.
>>>
>>> SRK
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>


   

Re: -field1:value1 OR field2:value2

[Erick Erickson]

Please do not cross post to multiple lists, it's considered bad
etiquette.

Solr does not implement strict boolean logic, please read:

https://lucidworks.com/blog/2011/12/28/why-not-and-or-and-not/

Best,
Erick

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 2:58 AM, Alexandre Rafalovitch
 wrote:
> I don't remember specifically :-(. Search the archives
> http://search-lucene.com/ or follow-up on Solr Users list. Remember to
> mention the version of Solr, as there were some bugs/features/fixes
> with OR, I think.
>
> Regards,
>   Alex.
> 
> Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates:
> http://www.solr-start.com/
>
>
> On 26 September 2016 at 16:56, Sandeep Khanzode
>  wrote:
>> Hi Alex,
>> It seems that this is not an issue with AND clause. For example, if I do ...
>> field1:value1 AND -field2:value2
>> ... the results seem to be an intersection of both.
>> Is this an issue with OR? Which is which we replace it with an implicit (*:* 
>> NOT)? SRK
>>
>> On Monday, September 26, 2016 3:09 PM, Sandeep Khanzode 
>>  wrote:
>>
>>
>>  Yup. That works. So does (*:* NOT ...)
>> Thanks, Alex.  SRK
>>
>> On Monday, September 26, 2016 3:03 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch 
>>  wrote:
>>
>>
>>  Try field2:value2 OR (*:* -field1=value1)
>>
>> There is a magic in negative query syntax that breaks down when it
>> gets more complex. It's been discussed on the mailing list a bunch of
>> times, though the discussions are hard to find by title.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alex.
>> 
>> Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates:
>> http://www.solr-start.com/
>>
>>
>> On 26 September 2016 at 16:06, Sandeep Khanzode
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> If I query for
>>> -field1=value1 ... I get, say, 100 records
>>> and if I query for
>>> field2:value2 ... I may get 200 records
>>>
>>> I would assume that if I query for
>>> -field1:value1 OR field2:value2
>>>
>>> ... I should get atleast 100 records (assuming they overlap, if not, upto 
>>> 300 records). I am assuming that the default joining is OR.
>>>  But I do not ...
>>> The result is that I get less than 100. If I didn't know better, I would 
>>> have said that an AND is being done.
>>>
>>> I am expecting records that EITHER do NOT contain field1:value1 OR which 
>>> contain field2:value2.
>>>
>>> Please let me know what I am missing. Thanks.
>>>
>>> SRK
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: -field1:value1 OR field2:value2

[Alexandre Rafalovitch]

I don't remember specifically :-(. Search the archives
http://search-lucene.com/ or follow-up on Solr Users list. Remember to
mention the version of Solr, as there were some bugs/features/fixes
with OR, I think.

Regards,
  Alex.

Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates:
http://www.solr-start.com/


On 26 September 2016 at 16:56, Sandeep Khanzode
 wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> It seems that this is not an issue with AND clause. For example, if I do ...
> field1:value1 AND -field2:value2
> ... the results seem to be an intersection of both.
> Is this an issue with OR? Which is which we replace it with an implicit (*:* 
> NOT)? SRK
>
> On Monday, September 26, 2016 3:09 PM, Sandeep Khanzode 
>  wrote:
>
>
>  Yup. That works. So does (*:* NOT ...)
> Thanks, Alex.  SRK
>
> On Monday, September 26, 2016 3:03 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch 
>  wrote:
>
>
>  Try field2:value2 OR (*:* -field1=value1)
>
> There is a magic in negative query syntax that breaks down when it
> gets more complex. It's been discussed on the mailing list a bunch of
> times, though the discussions are hard to find by title.
>
> Regards,
> Alex.
> 
> Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates:
> http://www.solr-start.com/
>
>
> On 26 September 2016 at 16:06, Sandeep Khanzode
>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>> If I query for
>> -field1=value1 ... I get, say, 100 records
>> and if I query for
>> field2:value2 ... I may get 200 records
>>
>> I would assume that if I query for
>> -field1:value1 OR field2:value2
>>
>> ... I should get atleast 100 records (assuming they overlap, if not, upto 
>> 300 records). I am assuming that the default joining is OR.
>>  But I do not ...
>> The result is that I get less than 100. If I didn't know better, I would 
>> have said that an AND is being done.
>>
>> I am expecting records that EITHER do NOT contain field1:value1 OR which 
>> contain field2:value2.
>>
>> Please let me know what I am missing. Thanks.
>>
>> SRK
>
>
>
>
>

Re: -field1:value1 OR field2:value2

[Sandeep Khanzode]

Hi Alex,
It seems that this is not an issue with AND clause. For example, if I do ...
field1:value1 AND -field2:value2 
... the results seem to be an intersection of both.
Is this an issue with OR? Which is which we replace it with an implicit (*:* 
NOT)? SRK 

On Monday, September 26, 2016 3:09 PM, Sandeep Khanzode 
 wrote:
 

 Yup. That works. So does (*:* NOT ...)
Thanks, Alex.  SRK 

    On Monday, September 26, 2016 3:03 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch 
 wrote:
 

 Try field2:value2 OR (*:* -field1=value1)

There is a magic in negative query syntax that breaks down when it
gets more complex. It's been discussed on the mailing list a bunch of
times, though the discussions are hard to find by title.

Regards,
    Alex.

Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates:
http://www.solr-start.com/


On 26 September 2016 at 16:06, Sandeep Khanzode
 wrote:
> Hi,
> If I query for
> -field1=value1 ... I get, say, 100 records
> and if I query for
> field2:value2 ... I may get 200 records
>
> I would assume that if I query for
> -field1:value1 OR field2:value2
>
> ... I should get atleast 100 records (assuming they overlap, if not, upto 300 
> records). I am assuming that the default joining is OR.
>  But I do not ...
> The result is that I get less than 100. If I didn't know better, I would have 
> said that an AND is being done.
>
> I am expecting records that EITHER do NOT contain field1:value1 OR which 
> contain field2:value2.
>
> Please let me know what I am missing. Thanks.
>
> SRK


  

   

Re: -field1:value1 OR field2:value2

[Sandeep Khanzode]

Yup. That works. So does (*:* NOT ...)
Thanks, Alex.  SRK 

On Monday, September 26, 2016 3:03 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch 
 wrote:
 

 Try field2:value2 OR (*:* -field1=value1)

There is a magic in negative query syntax that breaks down when it
gets more complex. It's been discussed on the mailing list a bunch of
times, though the discussions are hard to find by title.

Regards,
    Alex.

Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates:
http://www.solr-start.com/


On 26 September 2016 at 16:06, Sandeep Khanzode
 wrote:
> Hi,
> If I query for
> -field1=value1 ... I get, say, 100 records
> and if I query for
> field2:value2 ... I may get 200 records
>
> I would assume that if I query for
> -field1:value1 OR field2:value2
>
> ... I should get atleast 100 records (assuming they overlap, if not, upto 300 
> records). I am assuming that the default joining is OR.
>  But I do not ...
> The result is that I get less than 100. If I didn't know better, I would have 
> said that an AND is being done.
>
> I am expecting records that EITHER do NOT contain field1:value1 OR which 
> contain field2:value2.
>
> Please let me know what I am missing. Thanks.
>
> SRK


   

Re: -field1:value1 OR field2:value2

[Alexandre Rafalovitch]

Try field2:value2 OR (*:* -field1=value1)

There is a magic in negative query syntax that breaks down when it
gets more complex. It's been discussed on the mailing list a bunch of
times, though the discussions are hard to find by title.

Regards,
Alex.

Newsletter and resources for Solr beginners and intermediates:
http://www.solr-start.com/


On 26 September 2016 at 16:06, Sandeep Khanzode
 wrote:
> Hi,
> If I query for
> -field1=value1 ... I get, say, 100 records
> and if I query for
> field2:value2 ... I may get 200 records
>
> I would assume that if I query for
> -field1:value1 OR field2:value2
>
> ... I should get atleast 100 records (assuming they overlap, if not, upto 300 
> records). I am assuming that the default joining is OR.
>  But I do not ...
> The result is that I get less than 100. If I didn't know better, I would have 
> said that an AND is being done.
>
> I am expecting records that EITHER do NOT contain field1:value1 OR which 
> contain field2:value2.
>
> Please let me know what I am missing. Thanks.
>
> SRK