When I have a field using CJKBigramFilter, parsed CJK chars have a different
parsedQuery than non-CJK queries.
(旧小说 is 3 chars, so 2 bigrams)
args sent in: q={!qf=bi_fld}旧小说pf=pf2=pf3=
debugQuery
str name=rawquerystring{!qf=bi_fld}旧小说/str
str
-- ticket is closed, but this
issue is not addressed.
and pertaining to skipping terms in phrase boosting when part of the query is a
phrase:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4130
- Naomi
On Sep 3, 2013, at 5:54 PM, Naomi Dushay wrote:
When I have a field using CJKBigramFilter
Hi Tom,
Sorry - I was meeting with the East-Asia librarians …
Perhaps you are missing the following from your solrconfig
lib dir=/home/blacklight/solr-home/lib /
(this is the top of my solrconfig.xml:
config
!-- NOTE: various comments and unused configuration possibilities have been
of the
characters before tokenization with a CharFilter.
Charles
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Naomi Dushay ndus...@stanford.edu wrote:
We are using the ICUFoldingFilterFactory with great success to fold
diacritics so searches with and without the diacritics get the same results.
We recently
We are using the ICUFoldingFilterFactory with great success to fold diacritics
so searches with and without the diacritics get the same results.
We recently discovered we have some Korean records that use an alif diacritic
instead of an apostrophe, and this diacritic is NOT getting folded.
Another thing I noticed when upgrading from Solr 1.4 to Solr 3.5 had to do with
results when there were hyphenated words: aaa-bbb. Erik Hatcher pointed me
to the autoGeneratePhraseQueries attribute now available on fieldtype
definitions in schema.xml. This is a great feature, and
=all_search:The Beatles as musicians : Revolver through the Anthology
final query: all_search:the beatl as musician revolv through the antholog
On Feb 22, 2012, at 7:34 PM, Robert Muir [via Lucene] wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Naomi Dushay [hidden email] wrote:
Jonathan has
provide your document?
If you could attach the document and the analysis config and queries
to a JIRA issue, that would be most ideal.
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Naomi Dushay [hidden email] wrote:
Robert,
You found it! it is the phrase slop. What do I do now? I am using
for this (in general for ANY phrase query,
increasing the slop should never remove results, only potentially
enlarge them).
It fails already... but its good to also have your test case too...
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Naomi Dushay [hidden email] wrote:
Robert,
I will create a jira
:45 PM, Naomi Dushay [hidden email] wrote:
Robert -
Did you mean for me to attach my docs to an existing ticket (which one?) or
just want to make sure I attach the docs to the new issue?
- Naomi
On Feb 23, 2012, at 11:39 AM, Robert Muir [via Lucene] wrote:
Please attach
I am working on upgrading Solr from 1.4 to 3.5, and I have hit a problem. I
have a test checking for a search result in Solr, and the test passes in Solr
1.4, but fails in Solr 3.5. Dismax is the desired QueryParser -- I just
included output from lucene QueryParser to prove the document
I forgot to include the field definition information:
schema.xml:
field name=all_search type=text indexed=true stored=false /
solr 3.5:
fieldtype name=text class=solr.TextField
positionIncrementGap=100 autoGeneratePhraseQueries=true
analyzer
tokenizer
' in such a way that the 'varying field analysis dismax gotcha' can
manifest with only one field, if the way dismax counts tokens for 'mm'
differs from number of tokens the single field's analysis produces?
Jonathan
On 2/22/2012 2:55 PM, Naomi Dushay wrote:
I am working on upgrading Solr from 1.4
manifest with only one field, if the way dismax counts tokens for 'mm'
differs from number of tokens the single field's analysis produces?
Jonathan
On 2/22/2012 2:55 PM, Naomi Dushay wrote:
I am working on upgrading Solr from 1.4 to 3.5, and I have hit a problem.
I have a test
Chris Beer just did a revamp of the wiki page at:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HierarchicalFaceting
Yay Chris!
- Naomi
( ... and I helped!)
On Aug 22, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Naomi Dushay wrote:
Chris,
Is there a document somewhere on how to do this? If not, might you
create one? I could
Chris,
Is there a document somewhere on how to do this? If not, might you
create one? I could even imagine such a document living on the Solr
wiki ... this one has mostly ancient content:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HierarchicalFaceting
- Naomi
and pf)
you'll get beter results. As it is, I think you'll see output like:
str name=parsedquery+() ()/str
showing that your query isn't actually going against
any fields
Best
Erick
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Naomi Dushay ndus...@stanford.edu
wrote:
I found a weird behavior with the Solr
I found a weird behavior with the Solr defType argument, perhaps with
respect to default queries?
defType=dismaxq=*:* no hits
q={!defType=dismax}*:* hits
defType=dismax hits
Here is the request handler, which I explicitly indicate:
requestHandler name=search
rose chain == records A and B
red rose chain == records A and B (!!)
For more details and more about the solution, see
http://discovery-grindstone.blogspot.com/2010/11/solr-and-hyphenated-words.html
- Naomi Dushay
Senior Developer
Stanford University Libraries
Robert,
Thanks! I've been using Solr 1.5 from trunk back in March - time to
upgrade! I also like the put the stopword filter after the WDF
filter fix.
- Naomi
On Nov 5, 2010, at 12:36 PM, Robert Muir wrote:
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Naomi Dushay ndus...@stanford.edu
wrote
/select?qt=standardq=+uniquekey:[* TO *] -
ffldname:[* TO *]
number of rows: rows=
offset: start=
- Naomi Dushay
Stanford University Libraries
http://searchworks.stanford.edu -- Blacklight on top of Solr
I'm having trouble with replication, and i believe it's because the
indexversion isn't updating on master.
My solrconfig.xml on master:
requestHandler name=/replication class=solr.ReplicationHandler
lst name=master
str name=replicateAfterstartup/str
str
Does it matter that my last index update did NOT add any new documents
and did NOT delete any existing documents? (For testing, I just re-
ran the last update)
- Naomi
On Apr 13, 2010, at 11:09 AM, Naomi Dushay wrote:
I'm having trouble with replication, and i believe it's because
I have a field that has millions of values, and I need to get the
next X values in alpha order. The terms component works fabulously
for this.
Here is a cooked up example of the terms
a
b
f
q
r
rr
rrr
y
z
zzz
So if I ask for the 3 terms after r, I get rr, rrr and y.
But now I'd like to
The javadoc for DisMaxQParserPlugin states:
{!dismax qf=myfield,mytitle^2}foo creates a dismax query
but actually, that gives an error.
The correct syntax is
{!dismax qf=myfield mytitle^2}foo
(could use single quote instead of double quote).
- Naomi
It's not just the spaces - it's that the quotes (single or double
flavor) is required as well.
On Sep 23, 2009, at 3:10 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Naomi Dushay ndus...@stanford.edu
wrote:
The javadoc for DisMaxQParserPlugin states:
{!dismax qf=myfield
Okay, but
{!dismax qf=myfield mytitle^2}foo works
{!dismax qf=myfield mytitle^2}foo does NOT work
- Naomi
On Sep 23, 2009, at 5:52 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Naomi Dushay ndus...@stanford.edu
wrote:
It's not just the spaces - it's that the quotes
. (but then again: i don't work in a library. i trust
that
you know something i don't about what your users want.)
-Hoss
Naomi Dushay
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
, 2008, at 9:41 AM, Alexander Ramos Jardim wrote:
I did not even understand what you are considering to be the order
on your
call numbers.
2008/11/26 Naomi Dushay [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have a performance problem and I haven't thought of a clever way
around
it.
I work at the Stanford University
Gosh, I'm sorry to be so unclear. Hmm. Trying to clarify below:
On Nov 28, 2008, at 3:52 PM, Chris Hostetter wrote:
Having read through this thread, i'm not sure i understand what
exactly
the problem is. my naive understanding is...
1) you want to sort by a field
2) you want to be able
I have a performance problem and I haven't thought of a clever way
around it.
I work at the Stanford University Libraries. We have a collection of
over 8 million items. Each item has a call number. I have been asked
to provide a way to browse forward and backward from an arbitrary call
of these characters because they denote
subfields in the data. But why would we want them to be searchable?
Naomi Dushay
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
32 matches
Mail list logo
