am Content Group
(615) 213-4311
-Original Message-
From: Nalini Kartha [mailto:nalinikar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 11:49 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Using multiple DirectSolrSpellcheckers for a query
Hi James/Robert,
Thanks for the responses.
Robert:
Hi James/Robert,
Thanks for the responses.
Robert: What is it about the current APIs that makes this hard? How
much/what kind of refactoring would open this up?
James: I didn't quite understand the usage you suggested. I thought that
the spellcheck.q param shouldn't include field names, etc and
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Nalini Kartha wrote:
>
> Is there any reason why Solr doesn't support using multiple spellcheckers
> for a query? Is it because of performance overhead?
>
Thats not the case really, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2926
I think the issue is that th
pellcheck" fields
have pretty much the same or similar analysis. You might not need both of
them. Possibly this would be a way to save some index-bloat?
James Dyer
E-Commerce Systems
Ingram Content Group
(615) 213-4311
-----Original Message-
From: Nalini Kartha [mailto:nalinikar.
Hi James,
Thanks for the detailed reply and sorry for the delay getting back.
One issue for us with using the collate functionality is that some of our
query types are default OR (implemented using the mm param value). Since
the collate functionality reruns the query using all param values speci
Nalini,
Right now the best you can do is to use to combine everything into
a catch-all for spellchecking purposes. While this seems wasteful, this often
has to be done anyhow because typically you'll need less/different analysis for
spellchecking than for searching. But rather than having se
