You get that behavior by avoiding any extra syntax. Use this query: a:valueAlpha b:valueBeta c:valueGamma
If one of the terms is very common and one is very rare, it might not sort on pure existance. This is a tf.idf engine. wunder On 8/1/07 11:00 AM, "Lance Lance" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On this subject: > > I thought that this query would find at least one of the given values: > +(a:valueAlpha a:valueBeta a:valueGamma) > It would sort returns by 'have all 3', 'have 2', and 'have 1'. In fact, it > only finds records with all three. That is, it is exactly the same as: > +a:valueAlpha +a:valueBeta +a:valueGamma > I have to use OR between the values. > > Is this supposed to be true? > > Thanks, > > Lance > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 12:48 AM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: searching multiple fields > > > : > StandardRequestHandler), but I also want to be able to use Lucene's > : > boolean syntax (AND/OR/NOT). This doesn't seem to be supported by > : > DisMaxRequestHandler. I will need to copy or extend > > for the record, using the Lucene boolean options "+" and "-" do work in the > "q" expression for the dismax handler ... for that matter, the boolean > keywords AND, OR, and NOT work as well (allthough i never intended them to. > funny story: when i was writing dismax, i assumed i needed to do something > to prevent AND/OR/NOT from working, after writing most of it i went to test > it and discovered they didn't work and figured something else i was doing in > my QUeryParser subclass was alrady taking care of it and moved on to deal > with other problems --- it wasn't until months later that i realized i was > an idiot and was typing "and" but the QueryParser only recognizes the > uppercase versions) > > The only part of the "boolean" syntax that doesn't work is compelx boolean > expressions using parens. > > > > > > -Hoss >
