There'd be no point having them the same. You're likely to include boosts in your pf, so that docs that match the phrase query as well as the term query score higher than those that just match the term query.
Such as: qf=text description&pf=text^2 description^4 Upayavira On Mon, Oct 28, 2013, at 05:44 PM, Amit Nithian wrote: > Thanks Erick. Numeric fields make sense as I guess would strictly string > fields too since its one term? In the normal text searching case though > does it make sense to have qf and pf differ? > > Thanks > Amit > On Oct 28, 2013 3:36 AM, "Erick Erickson" <erickerick...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > The facetious answer is "when phrases aren't important in the fields". > > If you're doing a simple boolean match, adding phrase fields will add > > expense, to no good purpose etc. Phrases on numeric > > fields seems wrong. > > > > FWIW, > > Erick > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Amit Nithian <anith...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have been using Solr for years but never really stopped to wonder: > > > > > > When using the dismax/edismax handler, when do you have the qf different > > > from the pf? > > > > > > I have always set them to be the same (maybe different weights) but I was > > > wondering if there is a situation where you would have a field in the qf > > > not in the pf or vice versa. > > > > > > My understanding from the docs is that qf is a term-wise hard filter > > while > > > pf is a phrase-wise boost of documents who made it past the "qf" filter. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > Amit > > > > >
