Hi
i have a question regarding synonymfilter
i have a one way mapping defined
austin martin, astonmartin = aston martin
...
Can anybody please explain if my observation is correct. This is a very
critical aspect for my work.
That is correct - the synonym filter can recognize multi-token
No- there are various analyzers. StandardAnalyzer is geared toward
searching bodies of text for interesting words - punctuation is
ripped out. Other analyzers are more useful for concrete text. You
may have to work at finding one that leaves punctuation in.
My problem is not with the
Here's my question:
I have some products that I want to allow people to search for with
wild cards. For example, if my product is YBM354, I'd like for users to
be able to search on YBM*, YBM3*, YBM35* and for any of these
searches to return that product. I've found that I can search for
YBM*
You can escape the string with
org.apache.lucene.queryParser.QueryParser.escape(String query)
http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_4_0/api/org/apache/lucene/queryParser/QueryParser.html#escape%28java.lang.String%29
-Original Message-
From: ptomb...@gmail.com [mailto:ptomb...@gmail.com]
Does this mean I should have converted my objects to string before
writing them to the server?
I believe SolrJ takes care of that for you by calling toString(), but you would
need to convert explicitly when you query (and then escape).
It looks like things have changed a bit since this subject was last
brought
up here. I see that there are support in Solr/Lucene for indexing
payload
data (DelimitedPayloadTokenFilterFactory and
DelimitedPayloadTokenFilter).
Overriding the Similarity class is straight forward. So
Ok still not working with new field text_two:
str name=qtext:Har* text_two:Har*/str
== result 0
Schema Updates:
fieldType name=text_two class=solr.TextField
positionIncrementGap=100
analyzer type=index
tokenizer class=solr.LowerCaseTokenizerFactory/
filter
Hey Ken,
Thanks for your reply.
When I wrote '5|6' I ment that this is a multiValued field with two
values
'5' and '6', rather than the literal string '5|6' (and any Tokenizer).
Does
your reply still holds? That is, are multiValued fields dependent on
the
notion of tokenization to such a
The problem is that the indexed form of this XML is flattened so the
car
entity has 2 garage names, 2 min values and 2 max values, but the
grouping
between the garage name and it's min and max values is lost. The
danger is
that we end up doing a comparison of the min-of-the-mins and the
Hey,
I have a field defined as such:
field name=site_idtype=string indexed=true
stored=false
multiValued=true /
with the string type defined as:
fieldtype name=string class=solr.StrField sortMissingLast=true
omitNorms=true/
When I try using some query-time boost parameters
You haven't given us the full details on how you are using the
SynonymFilterFactory (expand true or false?) but in general: yes the
SynonymFilter finds the longest match it can.
Sorry - doing expansion at index time:
filter class=solr.SynonymFilterFactory synonyms=title_synonyms.txt
Filter queries with arbitrary text values may swamp the cache in 1.3.
Are you implying this won't happen in 1.4? Can you point me to the feature
that would mitigate this?
Otherwise, the combinations aren't infinite. Keep the filters seperate
in order to limit their number. Specify two
Filter queries with arbitrary text values may swamp the cache in
1.3.
Are you implying this won't happen in 1.4?
I intended to say just this, but I was on the wrong track.
Can you point me to the feature that would mitigate this?
What I was thinking of is the following:
That's a great question. And the answer is, of course, it depends. Mostly on
the size of the documents you are indexing. 50 million rows from a database
table with a handful of columns is very different from 50 million web pages,
pdf documents, books, etc.
We currently have about 50
We have a field with index-time synonyms called title. Among the entries in
the synonyms file are
vp,vice president
svp,senior vice president
However, a search for vp does not return results where the title is senior
vice president. It appears that the term vp is not indexed when there is a
The recent discussion of filter queries has got me thinking about other ways to
improve performance of our app. We have an index with a lot of fields and we
support both single-search-box style queries using DisMax and fielded search
using the standard query handler. We also support using
?q=facetFormat_product_s:Pfqs ePub eBook Sfqsqt=dismaxrequest - dose
not
return results,
although field facetFormat_product_s is defined in dismaxrequest
Handler of
solrconfig.xml
When you use the dismax handler, you don't need to specify the field in the
query string. It's meant to be
-Original Message-
From: Fergus McMenemie [mailto:fer...@twig.me.uk]
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 3:41 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: fq vs. q
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Michael Ludwig m...@as-guides.com
wrote:
I've summarized what I've learnt about
When I try testing the filter solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory I get
different results calling the following urls:
1. http://[server-ip]:[server-port]/solr/[core-
name]/select/?q=all%3Apapaversion=2.2start=0rows=10indent=on
2. http://[server-ip]:[server-port]/solr/[core-
A Unit test would be ideal, but even if you can just provide a list of
steps (ie: using this solrconfig+schema, index these docs, then update
this one doc, then execute this search) it can help people track things
down.
Please open a bug and attach as much detail as you can there.
-Hoss
Hello Solrites (or Solrorians)
I prefer Solrdier :)
Is it possible to get the average ranking score for a set of docs that
would be returned for a given facet value.
If not in SOLR, what about Lucene?
How hard to implement?
I have years of Java experience, but no Lucene coding
Yes, but dates are fairly spesific, say 06:45 Nov. 2 , 2009. What if
I
want to say Sort so that withing entries for Nov. 2 , you sort by
relevance for example?
Append /DAY to the date value you index, for example
1995-12-31T23:59:59Z/DAY will yield 1995-12-31
So that all
Hi,
I'm storing some raw xml in solr (stored and non-tokenized). I'd like
to
highlight hits in the response, obviously this is problematic as the
highlighting elements are also xml. So if I match an attribute value or
tag
name, the xml response is messed up. Is there a way to highlight
I believe you can use a function query to do this:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery
if you embed the following in your query, you should get a boost for more
recent date values:
_val_:ord(dateField)
Where dateField is the field name of the date you want to use.
-Original
Yeah great idea, thanks. Does anyone know if there is code out there
that
will do this sort of thing?
Perhaps a much simpler option would be to use this:
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/api/org/apache/solr/analysis/PatternReplaceFilterFactory.html
with a regex of [^]* or something like that -
Yes, but dates are fairly spesific, say 06:45 Nov. 2 , 2009. What if I
want to say Sort so that withing entries for Nov. 2 , you sort by
relevance for example?
Append /DAY to the date value you index, for example
1995-12-31T23:59:59Z/DAY will yield 1995-12-31
So that all documents with the
Add the following parameters to the url:
hl=truehl.fl=xhtml
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HighlightingParameters
-Original Message-
From: Bertrand DUMAS-PILHOU [mailto:bdum...@eurocortex.fr]
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 4:43 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Highlight
I've never used them personally, but I think a function query would suit you
here. Function queries allow you to define a custom function as a component of
the score of a result document. Define a distance function based on the user's
current location and the that of the search result, such
Every product we have comes in colour and size combinations,
I need to do a
faceted search on these that allows for colour and size and
various other
fields. A single product may have multiple colours and multiple sizes.
For example a style might be available in black size 12, but
also
I'm no QueryParser expert, but I would probably start w/ the default
query parser in Solr (LuceneQParser), and then progress a bit to the
DisMax one. I'd ask specific questions based on what you see there.
If you get far enough along, you may consider asking for help on the
java-user list
for the quick response!
On Sep 23, 2008, at 5:12 PM, Ensdorf Ken wrote:
Hi-
I'm new to Solr, and I'm trying to figure out the best way to
configure it to use BoostingTermQuery in the scoring mechanism. Do
I need to create a custom query parser? All I want is the default
parser behavior except
31 matches
Mail list logo
