I'm not all that familiar with the underlying issues, but of the two I'd pick moving the WordDelimiterFactory rather than setting increments = "false".
But that's at least partly a guess.... Best Erick On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Demian Katz <demian.k...@villanova.edu>wrote: > Thanks for looking into this -- I appreciate the help (and feel a little > better that there seems to be a bug at work here and not just my total > incomprehension). > > Sorry for any confusion over the UnicodeNormalizationFactory -- that's > actually a plug-in from the SolrMarc project ( > http://code.google.com/p/solrmarc/) that slipped into my example. Also, > as you guessed, my default operator is indeed set to "AND." > > It sounds to me that, of your two proposed work-arounds, moving the > StopFilterFactory after WordDelimiterFactory is the least disruptive. I'm > guessing that disabling position increments across the board might have > implications for other types of phrase searches, while filtering stopwords > later in the chain should be more functionally equivalent, if slightly less > efficient (potentially more terms to examine). Would you agree with this > assessment? If not, what possible negative side effects am I forgetting > about? > > thanks, > Demian > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Erick Erickson [mailto:erickerick...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 10:04 PM > > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: Re: solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory problem with hyphenated > > terms? > > > > Well, for a quick trial using trunk, I had to remove the > > UnicodeNormalizationFactory, is that yours? > > > > But with that removed, I get the results you do, ASSUMING that you've > > set > > your default operator to AND in schema.xml... > > > > Believe it or not, it all changes and all your queries return a hit if > > you > > do one of two things (I did this in both index and query when testing > > 'cause > > I'm lazy): > > 1> move the inclusion of the StopFilterFactory after > > WordDelimiterFactory > > or > > 2> for StopFilterFactory, set enablePositionIncrements="false" > > > > I think either of these might work in your situation....... > > > > On doing some more investigation, it appears that if a hyphenated word > > is > > immediately after a stopword AND the above is true (stop factory > > included > > before WordDelimiterFactory and enablePositionIncrements="true"), then > > the > > search fails. I indexed this title: > > > > Love-customs in eighteenth-century Spain for nineteenth-century > > > > Searching in solr/admin/form.jsp for: > > title:(nineteenth-century) > > > > fails. But if I remove the "for" from the title, the above query works. > > Searching for > > title:(love-customs) > > always works. > > > > Finally, (and it's *really* time to go to sleep now), just setting > > enablePositionIncrements="false" in the "index" portion of the schema > > also > > causes things to work. > > > > Developer folks: > > I didn't see anything in a quick look in SOLR or Lucene JIRAs, should I > > refine this a bit (really, sleepy time is near) and add a JIRA? > > > > Best > > Erick > > > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Demian Katz > > <demian.k...@villanova.edu>wrote: > > > > > Hello. It has been a few weeks, and I haven't gotten any responses. > > > Perhaps my question is too complicated -- maybe a better approach is > > to try > > > to gain enough knowledge to answer it myself. My gut feeling is > > still that > > > it's something to do with the way term positions are getting handled > > by the > > > WordDelimiterFilterFactory, but I don't have a good understanding of > > how > > > term positions are calculated or factored into searching. Can anyone > > > recommend some good reading to familiarize myself with these concepts > > in > > > better detail? > > > > > > thanks, > > > Demian > > > > > > From: Demian Katz > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 9:47 AM > > > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > > > Subject: solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory problem with hyphenated > > terms? > > > > > > This is my first post on this list -- apologies if this has been > > discussed > > > before; I didn't come upon anything exactly equivalent in searching > > the > > > archives via Google. > > > > > > I'm using Solr 1.4 as part of the VuFind application, and I just > > noticed > > > that searches for hyphenated terms are failing in strange ways. I > > strongly > > > suspect it has something to do with the > > solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory > > > filter, but I'm not exactly sure what. > > > > > > The problem is that I have a record with the title "Love customs in > > > eighteenth-century Spain." Depending on how I search for this, I get > > > successes or failures in a seemingly unpredictable pattern. > > > > > > Demonstration queries below were tested using the direct Solr > > > administration tool, just to eliminate any VuFind-related factors > > from the > > > equation while debugging. > > > > > > Queries that work: > > > title:(Love customs in eighteenth century Spain) > > > // no hyphen, no phrases > > > title:("Love customs in eighteenth-century Spain") > > > // phrase search on whole title, with hyphen > > > > > > Queries that fail: > > > title:(Love customs in eighteenth-century Spain) > > > // hyphen, no phrases > > > title:("Love customs in eighteenth century Spain") > > > // phrase search on whole title, without hyphen > > > title:(Love customs in "eighteenth-century" Spain) > > > // hyphenated word as phrase > > > title:(Love customs in "eighteenth century" Spain) > > > // hyphenated word as phrase, hyphen removed > > > > > > Here is VuFind's text field type definition: > > > > > > <fieldType name="text" class="solr.TextField" > > > positionIncrementGap="100"> > > > <analyzer type="index"> > > > <tokenizer class="solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory"/> > > > <filter class="solr.StopFilterFactory" ignoreCase="true" > > > words="stopwords.txt" enablePositionIncrements="true"/> > > > <filter class="solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory" > > > generateWordParts="1" generateNumberParts="1" catenateWords="1" > > > catenateNumbers="1" catenateAll="0" splitOnCaseChange="1"/> > > > <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"/> > > > <filter class="solr.SnowballPorterFilterFactory" > > language="English" > > > protected="protwords.txt"/> > > > <filter class="solr.RemoveDuplicatesTokenFilterFactory"/> > > > <filter class="schema.UnicodeNormalizationFilterFactory" > > > version="icu4j" composed="false" remove_diacritics="true" > > > remove_modifiers="true" fold="true"/> > > > <filter class="solr.ISOLatin1AccentFilterFactory"/> > > > </analyzer> > > > <analyzer type="query"> > > > <tokenizer class="solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory"/> > > > <filter class="solr.SynonymFilterFactory" > > synonyms="synonyms.txt" > > > ignoreCase="true" expand="true"/> > > > <filter class="solr.StopFilterFactory" ignoreCase="true" > > > words="stopwords.txt" enablePositionIncrements="true"/> > > > <filter class="solr.WordDelimiterFilterFactory" > > > generateWordParts="1" generateNumberParts="1" catenateWords="1" > > > catenateNumbers="1" catenateAll="0" splitOnCaseChange="1"/> > > > <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"/> > > > <filter class="solr.SnowballPorterFilterFactory" > > language="English" > > > protected="protwords.txt"/> > > > <filter class="solr.RemoveDuplicatesTokenFilterFactory"/> > > > <filter class="schema.UnicodeNormalizationFilterFactory" > > > version="icu4j" composed="false" remove_diacritics="true" > > > remove_modifiers="true" fold="true"/> > > > <filter class="solr.ISOLatin1AccentFilterFactory"/> > > > </analyzer> > > > </fieldType> > > > > > > I did notice that in the "text" field type in VuFind's schema has > > > "catenateWords" and "catenateNumbers" turned on in both the index and > > query > > > analyzer chains. It is my understanding that these options should be > > > disabled for the query chain and only enabled for the index chain. > > However, > > > this may be a red herring -- I have already tried changing this > > setting, but > > > it didn't change the success/failure pattern described above. I have > > also > > > played with the preserveOriginal setting without apparent effect. > > > > > > From playing with the Field Analysis tool, I notice that there is a > > gap in > > > the term position sequence after analysis... but I'm not sure if > > this is > > > significant. > > > > > > Has anybody else run into this sort of problem? Any ideas on a fix? > > > > > > thanks, > > > Demian > > > > > > >
