Re: Leading wildcard searches very slow

https://lucene.apache.org/solr/4_6_0/solr-core/org/apache/solr/analysis/ReversedWildcardFilterFactory.html ? On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 4:01 AM mosheB wrote: > > Hi, is there any sophisticated way [using the schema] to block brutal regex > queries? > > > Thanks > > > > -- > Sent from:

Re: Leading wildcard searches very slow

Hi, is there any sophisticated way [using the schema] to block brutal regex queries? Thanks -- Sent from: https://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-User-f472068.html

Re: Performance comparison for wildcard searches

On 2/3/2020 12:06 PM, Rahul Goswami wrote: I am working with Solr 7.2.1 and had a question regarding the performance of wildcard searches. q=*:* vs q=id:* vs q=id:[* TO *] Can someone please rank them in the order of performance with the underlying reason? The only one of those

Performance comparison for wildcard searches

Hello, I am working with Solr 7.2.1 and had a question regarding the performance of wildcard searches. q=*:* vs q=id:* vs q=id:[* TO *] Can someone please rank them in the order of performance with the underlying reason? Thanks, Rahul

Re: question regarding wildcard-searches

also returns zero results... > > As I mentioned before: we are testing this all, so we are not really up to > speed with the why-does-this-do-that, although I am trying to learn. > > Thanks for any other pointers you can provide. > Greetings, > Roel > > -Origin

RE: question regarding wildcard-searches

Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com] Sent: vrijdag 16 maart 2018 17:08 To: solr-user Subject: Re: question regarding wildcard-searches If you goal is to search prefixes only, I'd go away from the _text_ field all together and use a "string" type. This will mean you need to 1>

Re: question regarding wildcard-searches

gt; >> >> -Original Message- >> From: jagdish vasani [mailto:jagdisht.vas...@gmail.com] >> Sent: vrijdag 16 maart 2018 12:41 >> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: Re: question regarding wildcard-searches >> >> Hi paesen, >> >>

Re: question regarding wildcard-searches

on this? > > Thanks already, > Roel > > > -Original Message- > From: jagdish vasani [mailto:jagdisht.vas...@gmail.com] > Sent: vrijdag 16 maart 2018 12:41 > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: question regarding wildcard-searches > > Hi paese

RE: question regarding wildcard-searches

[mailto:jagdisht.vas...@gmail.com] Sent: vrijdag 16 maart 2018 12:41 To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: question regarding wildcard-searches Hi paesen, Value - EO.1954.53.1 is indexed as below Eo 1954 53 1 Dot is removed.try with wildcard -? Like EO.1954.53.?? If you have 2 digits only in last.. I have

Re: question regarding wildcard-searches

<roel.pae...@africamuseum.be> wrote: > Hi everybody, > > We are experimenting with solr, and I have a (I think) basic-level > question: > we have a multiple fields, all copied into a generic field so we can > search everything at once. > However we have a (for us) stra

question regarding wildcard-searches

Hi everybody, We are experimenting with solr, and I have a (I think) basic-level question: we have a multiple fields, all copied into a generic field so we can search everything at once. However we have a (for us) strange situation doing wildcard searches for the contents of one specific field

Re: Wildcard searches with special character gives zero result

Solr does not analyze queries with wildcards in it. So, with ch*p-seq, it will search for terms that start with ch and end with p-seq. Since your indexer has analyzed all tokens before, only chip and seq are in the index. See

Re: Wildcard searches with special character gives zero result

I am using edismax query parser. On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Selvam Raman wrote: > Solr version - 6.4.0 > > "title_en":["Chip-seq"] > > When i fired query like below > > 1) chip-seq > 2) chi* > > it is giving expected result, for this case one result. > > But when i am

Wildcard searches with special character gives zero result

Solr version - 6.4.0 "title_en":["Chip-seq"] When i fired query like below 1) chip-seq 2) chi* it is giving expected result, for this case one result. But when i am searching with wildcard it produce zero result. 1) ch*p-seq if i use escape character in '-' it creates two terms rather than

Re: Leading wildcard searches very slow

6:06 a.m., "Sundeep T" <sundeep@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> We have several indexed string fields which is not tokenized and does not >> have docValues enabled. >> >> When we do leading wildcard searches on these fields the

Re: Leading wildcard searches very slow

ral indexed string fields which is not tokenized and does not > have docValues enabled. > > When we do leading wildcard searches on these fields they are running very > slow. We were thinking that since this field is indexed, such queries > should be running pretty quickly. We are usi

Leading wildcard searches very slow

Hi, We have several indexed string fields which is not tokenized and does not have docValues enabled. When we do leading wildcard searches on these fields they are running very slow. We were thinking that since this field is indexed, such queries should be running pretty quickly. We are using

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

Hi, You could try this: drop wildcard stuff altogether: 1) Employ edgengramfilter at index time. 2) Use plain searches at query time. Ahmet On Friday, November 25, 2016 4:59 PM, Sandeep Khanzode wrote: Hi All, Can someone please assist with this query?

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

Hi All, Can someone please assist with this query? My data consists of: 1.] John Doe 2.] John V. Doe 3.] Johnson Doe 4.] Johnson V. Doe 5.] John Smith 6.] Johnson V. Smith 7.] Matt Doe 8.] Matt V. Doe 9.] Matt Doe 10.] Matthew V. Doe 11.] Matthew Smith 12.] Matthew V. Smith Querying ... (a)

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

Hi All, Erick, Please suggest. Would like to use the ComplexPhraseQueryParser for searching text (with wildcard) that may contain special characters. For example ...John* should match John V. DoeJohn* should match Johnson SmithBruce-Willis* should match Bruce-WillisV.* should match John V. F.

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

Hi, This is the typical TextField with ...                         SRK On Thursday, November 24, 2016 1:38 AM, Reth RM wrote: what is the fieldType of those records?   On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 4:18 AM, Sandeep Khanzode

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

what is the fieldType of those records? On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 4:18 AM, Sandeep Khanzode < sandeep_khanz...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote: > Hi Erick, > I gave this a try. > These are my results. There is a record with "John D. Smith", and another > named "John Doe". > > 1.] {!complexphrase

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

Hi Erick, I gave this a try.  These are my results. There is a record with "John D. Smith", and another named "John Doe". 1.] {!complexphrase inOrder=true}name:"John D.*" ... does not fetch any results.  2.] {!complexphrase inOrder=true}name:"John D*" ... fetches both results.  Second

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

Thanks, Erick. I am actually not trying to use the String field (prefer a TextField here). But, in my comparisons with TextField, it seems that something like phrase matching with whitespace and wildcard (like, 'my do*' or say, 'my dog*', or say, 'my dog has*') can only be accomplished with a

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

You have to query text and string fields differently, that's just the way it works. The problem is getting the query string through the parser as a _single_ token or as multiple tokens. Let's say you have a string field with the "a b" example. You have a single token a b that starts at offset 0.

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

Hi Erick, Reth, The 'a\ b*' as well as the q.op=AND approach worked (successfully) only for StrField for me. Any attempt at creating a 'a\ b*' for a TextField does not match any documents. The parsedQuery in debug mode does show 'field:a b*'. I am sure there are documents that should match.

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

You can escape the space with a backslash as 'a\ b*' Best, Erick On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Reth RM wrote: > I don't think you can do wildcard on StrField. For text field, if your > query is "category:(test m*)" the parsed query will be "category:test OR >

Re: Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

I don't think you can do wildcard on StrField. For text field, if your query is "category:(test m*)" the parsed query will be "category:test OR category:m*" You can add q.op=AND to make an AND between those terms. For phrase type wild card query support, as per docs, it is

Wildcard searches with space in TextField/StrField

Hi, How does a search like abc* work in StrField. Since the entire thing is stored as a single token, is it a type of a trie structure that allows such wildcard matching?  How can searches with space like 'a b*' be executed for text fields (tokenized on whitespace)? If we specify this type of

Wildcard searches - field:aaaa* works but field:a*a does not

Hello Lucene Folks, Newbie here - I've found how Solr does Wildcard searches of the form field:a* using the EdgeNGramFilterFactory https://wiki.apache.org/solr/AnalyzersTokenizersTokenFilters#solr.EdgeNGramFilterFactory but I can't seem to dig up how to support wildcards

Re: Wildcard searches - field:aaaa* works but field:a*a does not

You don't need to ngram at all if your queries themselves are going to be wildcarded. Erik > On Dec 3, 2015, at 17:21, Kelly, Frank <frank.ke...@here.com> wrote: > > Hello Lucene Folks, > > Newbie here - I've found how Solr does Wildcard searches of the form &

Wildcard searches and tokenization

name. This means wildcard searches of fo* and ba* both return foo-bar, which is what we want. We have a problem when someone types in foo-b as a prefix. I would like to split this into foo and b, then use each as a prefix in a wildcard search. Is there an easy way to tell Solr, Tokenize this, then do

RE: Wildcard searches don't work

when you encounter things like this G... Best Erick On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com wrote: We're having difficulty with some wildcard searches in Solr 4.0Beta. We're using a copyField to write a tdate to a text_general field. We are using the default definition

Wildcard searches don't work

Hi, We're having difficulty with some wildcard searches in Solr 4.0Beta. We're using a copyField to write a tdate to a text_general field. We are using the default definition for the text_general field type. field name=my_date type=tdate indexed=true stored=true / field name

Re: Wildcard searches don't work

We're having difficulty with some wildcard searches in Solr 4.0Beta. We're using a copyField to write a tdate to a text_general field. We are using the default definition for the text_general field type.     field name=my_date type=tdate indexed=true stored=true /     field name

Re: Wildcard searches don't work

things like this G... Best Erick On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 7:00 AM, Ahmet Arslan iori...@yahoo.com wrote: We're having difficulty with some wildcard searches in Solr 4.0Beta. We're using a copyField to write a tdate to a text_general field. We are using the default definition

Wildcard searches in phrases throws exception

Hi, Is it possible to do wildcard searches on multiple words? Here's an example: We need to search on the words Dearly loved friends using this text:dearly * friends This blows up Solr with this exception. From my Googling, I see that the error has to do with too many tokens being

Re: Wildcard searches in phrases throws exception

Maybe you can take a look at this Jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-1604 On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Alexander Cougarman acoug...@bwc.orgwrote: Hi, Is it possible to do wildcard searches on multiple words? Here's an example: We need to search on the words Dearly loved

Re: Wildcard searches with leading and ending wildcard

. this means this query: /Num*4321*/ and this query: /Num:*1234*/ return exactly the same result. Is this the wrong approach? has anybody tried the N-gram solution to this problem? thanks very much Maurizio -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Wildcard-searches

Wildcard searches with leading and ending wildcard

Maurizio -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Wildcard-searches-with-leading-and-ending-wildcard-tp3992086.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Wildcard searches with leading and ending wildcard

-Original Message- From: maurizio1976 Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 8:21 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Wildcard searches with leading and ending wildcard Hi all, I've been searching for an answer to this everywhere but I can never find an answer that is perfect for my case, so I'll ask

Highlighting is not working for wildcard searches when TermVectors (hl.useFastVectorHighlighter) is enabled

Hi, Highlighting is not working for wildcard searches when TermVectors (hl.useFastVectorHighlighter) is enabled. I wanted to use FastVectorHighlighter to improve the performance of search results but when hl.useFastVectorHighlighter is enabled highlighting does not work in case of wildcard

Multiple character wildcard searches looks for 0 or more characters

Hello, I am using solr search application, try to search text with wildcard character getting some weird result. Case :- 1 q=tes* Result: test, test1, test2 Case:- 1 q=test* Result: NONE Kindly help me to solve above problem. Thanks Regards, Satyam

Re: Multiple character wildcard searches looks for 0 or more characters

I am using solr search application, try to search text with wildcard character getting some weird result. Case :- 1 q=tes* Result: test,  test1, test2 Case:- 1 q=test* Result: NONE Kindly help me to solve above problem. Do you have stemming filter defined in your analyzer

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

@lucene.apache.org Sent: Sat, February 5, 2011 4:06:54 AM Subject: Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches Correct me if I am wrong. Commit in index flushes SOLR cache but of course OS cache would still be useful? If a an index is updated every hour

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

, 2011 4:06:54 AM Subject: Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches Correct me if I am wrong. Commit in index flushes SOLR cache but of course OS cache would still be useful? If a an index is updated every hour then a warm up that takes less than 5 mins should

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

Message From: Salman Akram salman.ak...@northbaysolutions.net To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Fri, February 4, 2011 3:33:41 PM Subject: Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches I know so we are not really using it for regular warm-ups (in any case index

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

/Wildcard searches Well I assume many people out there would have indexes larger than 100GB and I don't think so normally you will have more RAM than 32GB or 64! As I mentioned the queries are mostly phrase, proximity, wildcard and combination of these. What exactly do you mean

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

AM Subject: Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches Correct me if I am wrong. Commit in index flushes SOLR cache but of course OS cache would still be useful? If a an index is updated every hour then a warm up that takes less than 5 mins should be more than enough

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

-user@lucene.apache.org; t...@statsbiblioteket.dk Sent: Tue, January 25, 2011 6:32:48 AM Subject: Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches By warmed index you only mean warming the SOLR cache or OS cache? As I said our index is updated every hour so I am not sure how much SOLR

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Tue, January 25, 2011 4:20:34 AM Subject: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches Hi, I am facing performance issues in three types of queries (and their combination). Some of the queries take more than 2-3 mins. Index size is around 150GB

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

...@northbaysolutions.net To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; t...@statsbiblioteket.dk Sent: Tue, January 25, 2011 6:32:48 AM Subject: Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches By warmed index you only mean warming the SOLR cache or OS cache? As I said our index is updated every

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

...@northbaysolutions.net To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Tue, January 25, 2011 4:20:34 AM Subject: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches Hi, I am facing performance issues in three types of queries (and their combination). Some of the queries take more than 2-3 mins. Index size

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

: Salman Akram salman.ak...@northbaysolutions.net To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Fri, February 4, 2011 3:33:41 PM Subject: Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches I know so we are not really using it for regular warm-ups (in any case index is updated on hourly basis

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Fri, February 4, 2011 3:38:55 PM Subject: Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches Well I assume many people out there would have indexes larger than 100GB and I don't think so normally you will have more RAM than 32GB or 64! As I

Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

Hi, I am facing performance issues in three types of queries (and their combination). Some of the queries take more than 2-3 mins. Index size is around 150GB. - Wildcard - Proximity - Phrases (with common words) I know CommonGrams and Stop words are a good way to resolve such issues

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 10:20 +0100, Salman Akram wrote: Cache warming is a good option too but the index get updated every hour so not sure how much would that help. What is the time difference between queries with a warmed index and a cold one? If the warmed index performs satisfactory, then

Re: Performance optimization of Proximity/Wildcard searches

By warmed index you only mean warming the SOLR cache or OS cache? As I said our index is updated every hour so I am not sure how much SOLR cache would be helpful but OS cache should still be helpful, right? I haven't compared the results with a proper script but from manual testing here are some

wildcard searches not consistent

Hi, Still working on extending my proof of concept by working off the example configuration and modifying the schema.xml. Having trouble with wildcard searches: factory OR faction -- 40 results (ok) factory -- 1 result (ok) faction -- 39 results (ok) facti?n -- 39 results (ok) fact* -- 40

Re: wildcard searches not consistent

That was it! Thank you very much. - Original Message From: Robert Muir rcm...@gmail.com To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Tue, September 14, 2010 5:58:03 PM Subject: Re: wildcard searches not consistent but facto?y -- 0 (expecting 1) you have stemming enabled for the field

RE: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr

! -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: imranak [mailto:imranak...@gmail.com] Gesendet: Montag, 12. Juli 2010 23:55 An: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Betreff: RE: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr Hi, Thanks for you response. The dismax query parser doesn't support it but I heard the edismax parser supports

Re: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr

Hi, earlier this week i started messing with getting wildcard queries to be analysed i've got some weird analysers doing stemming/lowercasing and writing in the same rules into a custom queryparser didn't seem logical given i just want the analysers to apply as they do at index time i

Re: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr

hi, sorry realised i had a typo: of course, non of this is going to sort out trying to match against the query co?mput?r because you've probably stemmed computer to comput or something at index time -- but if you add in a copyfield to an extra field that isn't stemmed at query time, then

Re: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr

Thank you so much guys. You solved my problem :) :) The problem was I was using stemming, I removed that it works perfectly now. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Problem-with-Wildcard-searches-in-Solr-tp961448p963744.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing

Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr

Hi, I am having a problem doing wildcard searches in lucene syntax using the edismax handler. I have Solr 4.0 nightly build from the trunk. A general search like 'computer' returns results but 'com*er' doesn't return any results. Similary, a search like 'co?mput?r' returns no results. The only

RE: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr

,   -Original message- From: imranak imranak...@gmail.com Sent: Mon 12-07-2010 22:40 To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; Subject: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr Hi, I am having a problem doing wildcard searches in lucene syntax using the edismax handler. I have Solr 4.0 nightly build

RE: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr

Hi, Thanks for you response. The dismax query parser doesn't support it but I heard the edismax parser supports all kinds of wildcards. Been trying it out but without any luck. Could someone please help me with that. I'm unable to make leading and in-the-middle wildcard searches work. Thanks

RE: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr

@lucene.apache.org; Subject: RE: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr Hi, Thanks for you response. The dismax query parser doesn't support it but I heard the edismax parser supports all kinds of wildcards. Been trying it out but without any luck. Could someone please help me with that. I'm unable to make

Re: Problem with Wildcard searches in Solr

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 4:39 PM, imranak imranak...@gmail.com wrote: A general search like 'computer' returns results but 'com*er' doesn't return any results. This is due to issues with wildcards and stemming. computer is indexed and searched as comput... but it's not generally possible to stem

Re: Wildcard searches within phrases to use proximity

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 12:33 AM, AHMET ARSLAN iori...@yahoo.com wrote: That'd be great. Please open an issue in Jira and attach a patch. See http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToContribute Hi Shalin, I opened an issue (SOLR-1604) and attached a patch as well as a maven project to enable

Re: Wildcard searches within phrases to use proximity

That'd be great. Please open an issue in Jira and attach a patch. See http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToContribute Hi Shalin, I opened an issue (SOLR-1604) and attached a patch as well as a maven project to enable this feature without applying the patch. I couldn't consume

Re: Wildcard searches within phrases to use proximity

On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:29 AM, AHMET ARSLAN iori...@yahoo.com wrote: You can do it with the complexphrasequery parser in lucerne contrib (I think that's the name). You have to plug it in to solr though - someone has already donethis bit I'm not sure if it was controbbed back. I

Re: Wildcard searches within phrases to use proximity

You can do it with the complexphrasequery parser in lucerne contrib (I think that's the name). You have to plug it in to solr though - someone has already donethis bit I'm not sure if it was controbbed back. I would be happy to contribute it, what should i do?

Re : wildcard searches

De : Avlesh Singh avl...@gmail.com À : solr-user@lucene.apache.org Envoyé le : Lundi, 5 Octobre 2009, 20h30mn 54s Objet : Re: wildcard searches Zambrano is right, Laurent. The analyzers for a field are not invoked for wildcard queries. You custom filter is not even getting executed

Re: Re : wildcard searches

each token in your filter) might work. Could you explain this point please ? Laurent De : Avlesh Singh avl...@gmail.com À : solr-user@lucene.apache.org Envoyé le : Lundi, 5 Octobre 2009, 20h30mn 54s Objet : Re: wildcard searches Zambrano is right

Re : Re : wildcard searches

De : Avlesh Singh avl...@gmail.com À : solr-user@lucene.apache.org Envoyé le : Mardi, 6 Octobre 2009, 10h41mn 56s Objet : Re: Re : wildcard searches You are processing your tokens in the filter that you wrote. I am assuming it is the first filter being applied and removes

Re: Re : Re : wildcard searches

with accentued characters. Cause the original token is not stored with this filter. Laurent De : Avlesh Singh avl...@gmail.com À : solr-user@lucene.apache.org Envoyé le : Mardi, 6 Octobre 2009, 10h41mn 56s Objet : Re: Re : wildcard searches You

wildcard searches

Hi everyone, I have a little question regarding the search engine when a wildcard character is used in the query. Let's take the following example : - I have sent in indexation the word Hésitation (with an accent on the e) - The filters applied to the field that will handle this word, result in

Re: wildcard searches

No filters are applied to wildcard/fuzzy searches. I couldn't find a reference to this on either the solr or lucene documentation but I read it on the Solr book from PACKT On 10/05/2009 12:09 PM, Angel Ice wrote: Hi everyone, I have a little question regarding the search engine when a

Re: wildcard searches

No filters are applied to wildcard/fuzzy searches. Ah! Not like that .. I guess, it is just that the phrase searches using wildcards are not analyzed. Cheers Avlesh On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 10:42 PM, Christian Zambrano czamb...@gmail.comwrote: No filters are applied to wildcard/fuzzy

Re: wildcard searches

Avlesh, I don't understand your answer. First of all, I know of no way of doing wildcard phrase queries. When I said not filters, I meant TokenFilters which is what I believe you mean by 'not analyzed' On 10/05/2009 12:27 PM, Avlesh Singh wrote: No filters are applied to wildcard/fuzzy

Re: wildcard searches

First of all, I know of no way of doing wildcard phrase queries. http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ#Can_I_combine_wildcard_and_phrase_search.2C_e.g._.22foo_ba.2A.22.3F When I said not filters, I meant TokenFilters which is what I believe you mean by 'not analyzed' Analysis is a

Re: wildcard searches

Zambrano is right, Laurent. The analyzers for a field are not invoked for wildcard queries. You custom filter is not even getting executed at query-time. If you want to enable wildcard queries, preserving the original token (while processing each token in your filter) might work. Cheers Avlesh

Re: wildcard searches

On 10/05/2009 01:18 PM, Avlesh Singh wrote: First of all, I know of no way of doing wildcard phrase queries. http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ#Can_I_combine_wildcard_and_phrase_search.2C_e.g._.22foo_ba.2A.22.3F Thanks for that link When I said not filters, I meant

RE: Wildcard searches

@lucene.apache.org [mailto:solr-user-return-20352-laurent.vauthrin=disney@lucene.apache .org] On Behalf Of Otis Gospodnetic Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:11 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Wildcard searches Hi, Another option for 1) is to use n-grams with token begin

RE: Wildcard searches

@lucene.apache.org [mailto:solr-user-return-20352-laurent.vauthrin=disney@lucene.apache .org] On Behalf Of Otis Gospodnetic Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 9:11 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Wildcard searches Hi, Another option for 1) is to use n-grams with token begin/end

Re: Wildcard searches

a custom QParserPlugin. Otis -- Sematext -- http://sematext.com/ -- Lucene - Solr - Nutch - Original Message From: Vauthrin, Laurent laurent.vauth...@disney.com To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 5:45:30 PM Subject: Wildcard searches Hello again, I'm

Wildcard searches

. 1. Leading wildcard searches/suffix searches (e.g. *ickey) I've looked at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-218. Is the best approach to create a QParserPlugin and change the parser to allow leading wildcards - setAllowLeadingWildcard(true)? At the moment we're trying to avoid indexing

RE: Best use of wildcard searches

Thanks, Lance. I recall reading that Lucene is used in a superfast RDF query engine: http://www.deri.ie/about/press/releases/details/?uid=55ref=213. Jon -Original Message- From: Lance Norskog [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The Protégé project at Stanford has nice tools for editing

Re: Best use of wildcard searches

-Original Message- From: Yonik Seeley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 August 2007 21:50 To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Best use of wildcard searches On 8/9/07, Matthew Runo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://66.209.92.171:8080/solr/select/?q=department_exact:Apparel% 3EMen's%20Apparel

Re: Best use of wildcard searches

On Aug 9, 2007, at 4:49 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: lo - these things can happen when you get too many levels of escaping needed. Hopefully we can improve the situation in the future to get rid of the query parser escaping for certain queries such as prefix and term. +1 :) this is

RE: Best use of wildcard searches

of wildcard searches Maybe there's a different way, in which path-like values like this are treated explicitly. I use a similar approach to Matthew at www.colfes.com, where all pages are generated from Lucene searches according to filters on a couple of hierarchical categories ('spaces'), i.e

RE: Best use of wildcard searches

Landron From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Best use of wildcard searches Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 14:59:36 -0700 To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org OK. So a followup question.. ?q=department_exact:Apparel%3EMen's% 20Apparel*fq=country_code:USfq=brand_exact:adidasfq=hibernated:true returns 0

Re: Best use of wildcard searches

I just saw an e-mail from Yonik suggesting escaping the space. I know so little about Solr that all I can do is parrot Yonik... Erick On 8/8/07, Matthew Runo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK. So a followup question.. ?q=department_exact:Apparel%3EMen's%

Re: Best use of wildcard searches

On 8/9/07, Matthew Runo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmm.. I just tried the following three queries... /?q=department_exact:ApparelMen's? ApparelJackets*fq=country_code:USfq=brand_exact:adidas... (no results) /?q=department_exact:ApparelMen's\

Re: Best use of wildcard searches

Here you go.. I thought that string wasn't munged, so I used that... field name=department type=text indexed=true stored=true/ field name=department_exact type=string indexed=true stored=true/ copyField source=department dest=department_exact/

Re: Best use of wildcard searches

On 8/9/07, Matthew Runo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here you go.. I thought that string wasn't munged, so I used that... field name=department type=text indexed=true stored=true/ field name=department_exact type=string indexed=true stored=true/ copyField source=department dest=department_exact/

Re: Best use of wildcard searches

Yes, we've reindexed several times. Here are three sample result sets.. 1 - ?q=department_exact:ApparelMen's? ApparelJackets*fq=country_code:USfq=brand_exact:adidas 2 - ?q=department_exact:ApparelMen's\ ApparelJackets*fq=country_code:USfq=brand_exact:adidas 3 -

Re: Best use of wildcard searches

On 8/9/07, Matthew Runo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, we've reindexed several times. Here are three sample result sets.. 1 - ?q=department_exact:ApparelMen's? ApparelJackets*fq=country_code:USfq=brand_exact:adidas 2 - ?q=department_exact:ApparelMen's\

Re: Best use of wildcard searches

On 8/9/07, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: They translate to different queries. But can I see the XML output for 1 and 2 with debugQuery=onindent=on appended? Or perhaps with wt=python would be less confusing seeing that there are '' chars in there that would otherwise be escaped.

  1   2   >