Hi,
We're looking at implementing highlighting for some fields which may be too
large to store in the index.
As an alternative to using the Solr Highlighter (which needs fields to be
stored), I was wondering if a) the offsets of terms are stored BY DEFAULT
in the index (even if we're not using
:
termVectors=true
termPositions=true
termOffsets=true
And use the fast vector highlighter.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message- From: Nalini Kartha Sent: Friday, September 20,
2013 7:34 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Getting term
offsets from Solr
Hi,
We're looking
I'm wondering if storing just the offset as a payload would be cheaper from
storage perspective than enabling termOffsets, termVectors and
termPositions? Maybe we could get the offset info to return with results
from there then?
Thanks,
Nalini
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Nalini Kartha
, implementing
a Collector that only looks for 1 document then quits.
James Dyer
E-Commerce Systems
Ingram Content Group
(615) 213-4311
-Original Message-
From: Nalini Kartha [mailto:nalinikar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 2:31 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject
/26/2012 03:10 PM, Nalini Kartha wrote:
Hi Otis,
Sorry, let me be more specific.
The end goal is for the DirectSpellChecker to make sure that the
corrections it is returning will return some results taking into account
the fq params included in the original query. This is a follow up question
, so maybe that helps?
Tell us more about what you're doing specifically, and maybe we can guide
you to a more elegant way to plug in any custom logic you want.
Erik
On Dec 26, 2012, at 11:21 , Nalini Kartha wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to figure out how to convert the fq params
Hi James,
Yup, that was what I tried to do initially but it seems like calling
through to those Solr methods from DirectSpellChecker was not a good idea -
am I wrong? And like you mentioned, this seemed like it wasn't low-level
enough.
Eric: Unfortunately the collate functionality does not work
to achieve?
Otis
Solr ElasticSearch Support
http://sematext.com/
On Dec 26, 2012 11:22 AM, Nalini Kartha nalinikar...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to figure out how to convert the fq params that are being
passed
to Solr into something that can be used to filter the results
from it (because mm=0 will just
cause the misspelled terms to be thrown out).
James Dyer
E-Commerce Systems
Ingram Content Group
(615) 213-4311
-Original Message-
From: Nalini Kartha [mailto:nalinikar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 8:53 AM
To: solr-user
# suggestions
required)
spellcheck.collate=true
spellcheck.collateExtendedResults=true
James Dyer
E-Commerce Systems
Ingram Content Group
(615) 213-4311
-Original Message-
From: Nalini Kartha [mailto:nalinikar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 2:06 PM
To: solr
there are no collations. The individual words would be helpful,
but you're not sure because they might all apply to items that do not match
fq=item:in_stock.
Is this the problem?
James Dyer
E-Commerce Systems
Ingram Content Group
(615) 213-4311
-Original Message-
From: Nalini Kartha
and
attach your work as a patch and see where it goes from there. (subscribe
to the dev list if you haven't already as that's where these type of
discussions usually happen).
James Dyer
E-Commerce Systems
Ingram Content Group
(615) 213-4311
-Original Message-
From: Nalini Kartha
INTERNAL_LEVENSHTEIN_DISTANCE metric)? And do
you think this would be of general use i.e. could it be contributed back to
Solr?
Thanks,
Nalini
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Nalini Kartha nalinikar...@gmail.comwrote:
Ah I see what you mean. Will probably try to change the response to look
like the internal shard one
need to get the document frequency of the query
terms, see http://wiki.apache.org/solr/TermsComponent , which maybe would
provide you a viable workaround.
James Dyer
E-Commerce Systems
Ingram Content Group
(615) 213-4311
-Original Message-
From: Nalini Kartha [mailto:nalinikar
.
James Dyer
E-Commerce Systems
Ingram Content Group
(615) 213-4311
-Original Message-
From: Nalini Kartha [mailto:nalinikar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 9:54 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Differentiate between correctly spelled term and mis
Hi,
In most of the examples I have seen for configuring the
DirectSolrSpellChecker the minPrefix attribute is set to 1 (and this is the
default value as well).
Is there any specific reason for this - would performance take a hit if it
was set to 0? We'd like to support returning corrections
in sample solrconfig.xmls have minPrefix set to 1.
Is this for performance reasons? And with this setting, we wouldn't get
run as a correction for eon right?
Thanks,
Nalini
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Robert Muir rcm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Nalini Kartha nalinikar
the results.
James Dyer
E-Commerce Systems
Ingram Content Group
(615) 213-4311
-Original Message-
From: Nalini Kartha [mailto:nalinikar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 11:56 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Using multiple DirectSolrSpellcheckers for a query
Hi,
We are trying to use the DirectSolrSpellChecker to get corrections for
mis-spelled query terms directly from fields in the Solr index.
However, we need to use multiple fields for spellchecking a query. It looks
looks like you can only use one spellchecker for a request and so the
workaround
19 matches
Mail list logo
