)
--
Matthew Hall
Software Engineer
Mouse Genome Informatics
mh...@informatics.jax.org
(207) 288-6012
18 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
Could you expand on your example and show the output you want? FWIW, you could
simply write a token filter that does the same thing as the WhitespaceTokenizer.
-Grant
On Dec 3, 2010, at 1:14 PM, Matthew Hall wrote:
Hey folks, I'm working with a fairly speci
Hey folks, I'm working with a fairly specific set of requirements for
our corpus that needs a somewhat tricky text type for both indexing and
searching.
The chain currently looks like this:
protected="protwords.txt"/>
Now you will notice that I'm trying to add in a second tokenizer to
tract: (mouse genome informatics) so that the query parser understands
that these are multiple terms for a single field.
Or am I misunderstanding here?
Matt
On 11/17/2010 1:44 PM, Matthew Hall wrote:
I'm getting the result set that matches what it would be if I just
searched for t
(mouse genome informatics) so that the query parser
understands that these are multiple terms for a single field.
Or am I misunderstanding here?
Matt
On 11/17/2010 1:44 PM, Matthew Hall wrote:
I'm getting the result set that matches what it would be if I just
searched for the first word in
I'm getting the result set that matches what it would be if I just
searched for the first word in the query.
So I'm getting the results for mouse.
And yes, abstract: is the name of the field.
So a search for
abstract: mouse
would yield 69103 results
abstract: mouse anythingelseIputhere
yiel
Good afternoon,
We are running some queries against a default query field (of type text)
that can be expected to be multiple words.
For example, after parsing the query form I'm left with something
something like this:
abstract: mouse genome informatics
The strange behavior that I am seein
We used the filters talked about at Lucid Imagination for our site, it
seems to work pretty well:
http://www.lucidimagination.com/blog/2009/09/08/auto-suggest-from-popular-queries-using-edgengrams/
Your mileage might vary, but its a pretty good place to start.
Matt
On 11/2/2010 1:56 PM, Peter
Bah.. nope this would miss documents that only match a subset of the
given terms.
I'm going to have to go with Steven's approach as the right choice here.
Matt
On 10/26/2010 3:44 PM, Matthew Hall wrote:
Indeed, I'd missed the second part of his requirements, my and
so
t;,
"andriod" and "samsung andriod".
I interpreted that to mean that hit
documents
should
contain terms from the query, and
nothing else.
Making
all terms required doesn't do this.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Hall [mailto:mh...@informatics.j
Um.. you could change your default clause to AND rather than or.
That should do the trick.
Matt
On 10/26/2010 2:26 PM, Dennis Gearon wrote:
Overkill?
Dennis Gearon
I can't think of a way to do it without writing new
analysis filters.
But I think you could do what you want with two filters
(
No.. you would just turn autocommit off, and have the thread that is
doing updates to your indexes commit every hour. I'd think that this
would take care of the scenario that you are describing.
Matt
On 10/18/2010 3:50 PM, Ezequiel Calderara wrote:
I understand, but i want to have control
12 matches
Mail list logo
