1) Did you mean i have to re-post this question at another location.? If so, could you provide me with the link?
2) I did read http://wiki.apache.org/solr/AnalyzersTokenizersTokenFilters#SynonymFilter But i still wasn't clear (sorry!!! Need some spoon feeding) so was hoping if someone could give a better explanation or suggestions as to how to use the synonym filter in my case based on the examples i outlined below. Thanks. hossman wrote: > > > 1) this question is really more suited for the solr-user list (since it is > a question about how to use a feature of solr) > > ... > : I passing the synonym filter only at query time and have expand=true > ... > > 2) please note the caveat about multiword synonyms on the wiki... > > http://wiki.apache.org/solr/AnalyzersTokenizersTokenFilters#SynonymFilter > >>> Keep in mind that while the SynonymFilter will happily work with >>> synonyms containing multiple words (ie: "sea biscuit, sea biscit, >>> seabiscuit") The recommended approach for dealing with synonyms like >>> this, is to expand the synonym when indexing. This is because there are >>> two potential issues that can arrise at query time: >>> >>> 1. The Lucene QueryParser tokenizes on white space before giving any >>> text to the Analyzer, so if a person searches for the words sea biscit >>> the analyzer will be given the words "sea" and "biscit" seperately, and >>> will not know that they match a synonym. >>> >>> 2. Phrase searching (ie: "sea biscit") will cause the QueryParser to >>> pass the entire string to the analyzer, but if the SynonymFilter is >>> configured to expand the synonyms, then when the QueryParser gets the >>> resulting list of tokens back from the Analyzer, it will construct a >>> MultiPhraseQuery that will not have the desired effect. This is because >>> of the limited mechanism available for the Analyzer to indicate that >>> two terms occupy the same position: there is no way to indicate that a >>> "phrase" occupies the same position as a term. For our example the >>> resulting MultiPhraseQuery would be "(sea | sea | seabiscuit) (biscuit >>> | biscit)" which would not match the simple case of "seabisuit" >>> occuring in a document > > > > -Hoss > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Need-an-explanation-for-this-synonym-behaviour-tp14283175p14357425.html Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
