Hi All,
I'm using the graph query parser to traverse a set of edge documents. An
edge looks like
"id":"edge1", "recordType":"journey", "Date":"2021-03-04T00:00:00Z", "Origin
":"AAC", "OriginLocalDateTime":"2021-03-04T05:00:00Z", "Destination":"AAB",
"DestinationLocalDateTime":"2021-03-04T07:00:00Z
Cheers Lee C
On 25 April 2018 at 00:37, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 4/24/2018 10:26 AM, Lee Carroll wrote:
> > Does the solr cell contrib give access to the files raw content along
> with
> > the extracted metadata?\
>
> That's not usually the kind of information you w
>From memory try the following:
Don't manually commit from client after batch indexing
set soft commit to be a a long time interval. As long as acceptable to run
stale, say 5 mins or longer if you can.
set hard commit to be short (seconds ) to keep everything neat and tidy
regards updates and avo
Does the solr cell contrib give access to the files raw content along with
the extracted metadata?
cheers Lee C
Hi,
I've ended up processing the doclist in the response twice. Once in the
write method and once in getContent. Its a bit inefficient but i'm only
looking at top doc each time so probably ok.
Is their a better way to do this ?
Cheers lee C
On 22 April 2018 at 13:26, Lee Carroll wr
are.
>
> Since your writting custom code anyway, my suggestion would be that
> perhaps you could make your custom ResponseWriter delegate to the javabin
> responsewriter if/when you see that this is an "isShard=true" request?
>
>
>
> : Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2018 18:42:58 +
.
lee c
On 19 April 2018 at 19:00, Mikhail Khludnev wrote:
> what if you put it into "defaults"?
>
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 8:42 PM, Lee Carroll >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I rewrote all of my tests to use SolrCloudTestCase rather than
> &
ause usually
> it's not a big deal to use one wt for responding user query like (wt=csv)
> and wt=javabin in internal communication between aggregator and slaves like
> it happens in wt=csv query.
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 2:19 PM, Lee Carroll >
> wrote:
>
>
amp;q=id:1&start=1&wt=csv&;
> csv.separator=&csv.encapsulator&csv.null=null
> ?
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Lee Carroll >
> wrote:
>
> > sorry cut n paste error i'd get
> >
> > {
> > "responseHeader":{
}},
"response":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"docs":[
{
"content":"my-content-value"}]
}}
but you get my point
On 18 April 2018 at 11:13, Lee Carroll wrote:
> for http://localhost:8983/solr/images/select?fl=content&a
y-content-value
On 18 April 2018 at 10:55, Mikhail Khludnev wrote:
> Lee, from this description I don see why it can't be addressed by fl,rows
> params. What makes it different form the typical Solr usage?
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Lee Carroll <
> lee.a.carr..
from describing why you need to create own response writer.
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 7:02 PM, Lee Carroll >
> wrote:
>
> > Ok. My expectation was the response writer would not be used until the
> > final serialization of the result. If my response writer breaks the
&
ted json.
> As far as I know only javabin might be used to distributed search
> underneath. Coordinator itself might yield json.
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 4:23 PM, Lee Carroll >
> wrote:
>
> > Sure
> >
> > with 1 shard 1 replica this request works fine
> >
d response should
> contains from schema.xml field.
> I encounter something like this while troubleshooting
> https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/6_6/transforming-
> result-documents.html#TransformingResultDocuments-
> CoresandCollectionsinSolrCloud
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 a
I've created a custom response writer which extends RawResponseWriter. The
basic operation is to output a single field value from the top matching doc
as the entire response. This works when shards = 1 but fails when shards
are greater than 1.
I throw an error if the field in question is missing f
#Ignore, mis-read the comment and its context.
On 13 April 2018 at 13:08, Lee Carroll wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm writing a custom response writer to output a very simple rendition of
> a solr result set to clients.
>
> In my tests I do:
>
> h.getCore().execute(h.get
Hi all,
I'm writing a custom response writer to output a very simple rendition of a
solr result set to clients.
In my tests I do:
h.getCore().execute(h.getCore().getRequestHandler(null),req,rsp);
which for a q=*:* request object returns a response with a BasicResultContext.
In TextResponseWr
The instructions at
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/UIMA+Integration to set up
UIMA integration with solr requires an alchemy api key. This is no longer
available as its part of the ibm watson offering.
What is the status of https://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrUIMA ?
Would I be bett
-z is specified BTW. The
> -c will start an _internal_ zookeeper in the absence of a -z
> parameter.
>
> Best,
> Erick
>
> On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Lee Carroll
> wrote:
> > Hi
> > running bin/solr start does not start up in cloud mode despite havin
Hi
running bin/solr start does not start up in cloud mode despite having
ZK_HOST set in /etc/default/solr.in.sh.
running openjdk 1.8
solr 6.5.1 on aws linux
zookeeper 3.4.6 on aws linux (3 node ensemble)
logs look clean both in zookeeper and solr
running bin/solr zk ls / returns
Connecting to
No Alexandre its just Sod's law (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Sod's+Law)
:-)
Lee C
On 20 October 2015 at 15:38, Alexandre Rafalovitch
wrote:
> On 20 October 2015 at 10:26, Lee Carroll
> wrote:
> > B*ll*cks, before posting I spent an hour searching for issues, hone
B*ll*cks, before posting I spent an hour searching for issues, honest.
Soon as I post within seconds I find
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-5800
On 20 October 2015 at 15:21, Lee Carroll
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> on solr 4.7 I've ran into a strange issue. Whilst setting u
Hi,
on solr 4.7 I've ran into a strange issue. Whilst setting up a field I've
noticed in the analysis form when I use a char filter factory (for example
HTMLSCF) with a tokeniser (ST) the analysis chain grinds to a halt. the
char filter does not seem to pass anything into the tokeniser.
Field typ
Hi
it was jars copied into a solr-zk-cli directory to allow easy running of
solr zk cmd line client. well i think that is what fixed tomcat! I've also
tried with jetty with a clean solr home and that also works and seems a
much cleaner way of running multiple instances (probably more to do with
ru
Hi all
Creating a new collection fails with class not found:
org.apache.solr.handler.component.SearchHandler
Running under tomcat 7.0.59 with solr 4.10.3. Solr app looks to be deployed
ok and the web app looks fine when browsing.
An external zookeeper set up looks fine and the configs are loaded
generate pseudo-fields if needed only on the server and do not allow
clients to generate them.
Just out of interest, what is the use-case for a pseudo-field whose value
is a repeat of the field name?
On 26 November 2014 at 15:55, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:47 AM,
een broken.
>
> -Yonik
> http://heliosearch.org - native code faceting, facet functions,
> sub-facets, off-heap data
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Lee Carroll
> wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > In solr 4.7 this query
> > /solr/coreName/sele
Hi All,
In solr 4.7 this query
/solr/coreName/select/?q=*:*&fl=%27nasty%20value%27&rows=1&wt=json
returns
{"responseHeader":{"status":0,"QTime":2},"response":{"numFound":189796,"start":0,"docs":[{"'nasty
value'":"nasty value"}]}}
This is naughty. Has this been seen before / fixed ?
I think he means a doc for each element. so you have a disease occurrence
index
1
1
exist
1-1
assuming (and its a pretty fair assumption?) most groups have only a subset
of diseases this will be a sparse matrix so just don't index
the occurrence value "does not exist"
basically denormalize via
Hi It looks like when a DIH entity has a delta and delta import query plus
a transformer defined the execution of both query's call the transformer. I
was expecting it to only be called on the import query. Sure we can check
for a null value or something and just return the row during the delta
qu
Hi
I've 2 tables with the following data
table 1
id treatment_list
1 a,b
2 b,c
table 2
treatment id, name
a name1
b name 2
c name 3
Using DIH can you create an index of the form
id-treatment-id name
1a name1
1b
o any parts of the query repeat a lot? Maybe there is room for fq.
>
> Otis
> Solr & ElasticSearch Support
> http://sematext.com/
> On Jan 9, 2013 6:08 AM, "Lee Carroll"
> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > We are doing a lat/lon look up query using i
Hi
We are doing a lat/lon look up query using ip address.
We have a 6.5 million document core of the following structure
start ip block
end ip block
location id
location_lat_lon
the field defs are
the query at the moment is simply a range query
q=startIpNum:[* TO 180891652]A
I use *analyzer type*="*query*" can you use search ?
On 17 December 2012 11:01, Dirk Högemann wrote:
> {!q.op=AND df=cl2Categories_NACE}08
> Gewinnung von Steinen und Erden, sonstiger Bergbau name="parsed_filter_queries">+cl2Categories_NACE:08
> +cl2Categories_NACE:gewinnung +cl2Categories_NAC
before the query component in the
> list of components for a handler and you should be fine.
>
> Cheers!
> Amit
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:39 AM, Lee Carroll >wrote:
>
> > Hi Amit
> >
> > I did not do this via a servlet filter as I wanted the solr d
Hi Amit
I did not do this via a servlet filter as I wanted the solr devs to be
concerned with solr config and keep them out of any concerns of the
container. By specifying declarative data in a request handler that would
be enough to produce a service uri for an application.
Or have I missed a p
Hi we are extending SearchHandler to provide a custom search request
handler. Basically we've added NamedLists called allowed , whiteList,
maxMinList etc.
These look like the default, append and invariant namedLists in the
standard search handler config. In handleRequestBody we then remove params
Hi Billy
see
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrSecurity
One approach is keep master internal, read only slaves with just select
handlers defined in the solr config for public facing requests.
See your app container security docs for other approaches
On 1 October 2012 16:32, Billy Newman wrote:
>
Cheers, saved the day
Lee C
On 28 September 2012 23:27, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
> : The issue we face is the f5 balancer is returning a cookie which the
> client
> : is hanging onto. resulting in the same slave being hit for all requests.
> ...
> : My question is can I configure the sol
nd the results would not only be different each time, they
> would flip-flop back and forth.
>
> I wouldn't do this unless and until you have a demonstrated need.
>
> Best
> Erick
>
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 8:07 AM, Lee Carroll
> wrote:
> > Hi Erick,
> >
e second query...
>
> But the stickiness is usually the way Solr is used, so this seems
> like a red herring.
>
> FWIW,
> Erick
>
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 7:06 AM, Lee Carroll
> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > We have the following solr http server
> >
>
Hi
We have the following solr http server
The issue we face is the f5 balancer is returning a cookie which the client
is hanging onto. resulting in the same slave being hit for all requests.
one obvious solution is to config the load balancer to be non sticky
however politically a "non-
take a look at
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/QueryElevationComponent
On 20 July 2012 03:48, Siping Liu wrote:
> Hi,
> I have requirements to place a document to a pre-determined position for
> special filter query values, for instance when filter query is
> fq=(field1:"xyz") place document abc as
see http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrPerformanceFactors#OutOfMemoryErrors
On 8 July 2012 12:37, Bruno Mannina wrote:
> Hi Lee,
>
> I tried group to my FID field and outch error 500 + outofmemory...
>
> I don't yet tested facets
>
> Thanks,
> Bruno
>
>
Hi Bruno,
As described See http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FieldCollapsing but also
faceting as this often fits the bill
On 7 July 2012 22:27, Bruno Mannina wrote:
> Dear Solr users,
>
> I have a field named "FID" for Family-ID:
> required="true" termVectors="true"/>
>
> My uniqueKey is the field
Hi Bruno
I'm not sure if that makes sense for a query which does not have a boolean
element to it. What is your use-case
On 7 July 2012 18:36, Bruno Mannina wrote:
> Dear Solr users,
>
> I have a field name "fid" defined as:
> required="true" termVectors="true"/>
>
> This "fid" can have a va
Sorry can't answer your question directly. However map scale may render
this very tricky or even redundant.
UI may be a better place for a solution rather than the data. Take a look
at https://developers.google.com/maps/articles/toomanymarkers for lots of
options
lee c
On 3 July 2012 03:49, mc
have a field which uses a synonym file of your antonyms and a keep
word filter and use this field in your not query
On 27 June 2012 15:54, RajParakh wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to specify an antonym list - similar to synonym list.
> Whats the best way to go about it?
>
>
> Currently, I am firing -
Sorry you have that link! and I did not see the question - apols
index schema could look something like:
id
name
classList -> multi value
majorClassList -> multi value
a standard query would do the equivalent of your sql
again apols for not seeing the link
lee c
On 27 June 2012 12:3
In your example de-normalising would be fine in a vast number of
use-cases. multi value fields are fine.
If you really want to, see http://wiki.apache.org/solr/Join but make
sure you loose the default relational dba world view first
and only go down that route if you need to.
On 27 June 2012 12
If you go down the keep-word route you can return the "tags" to the
front end app using a facet field query. This often fits with many
use-cases for doc tags.
lee c
On 23 June 2012 22:37, Jack Krupansky wrote:
> One important footnote: the "keep words/synonym analyzer" approach will
> index the
what is your db schema ? do you need to import all the schema ? (128
joined tables ??)
or are the tables all independant ? (if so dump them out and import
them in using csv)
cheers lee c
On 7 June 2012 02:32, Jihyun Suh wrote:
> Each table has 35,000 rows. (35 thousands).
> I will check the log
I'm not sure about your approach, turning off most of the features
which produce a similarity measure in a vsm and then wanting to sort
by a similarity could lead to pain. (I don't know your usecase so this
could still be valid)
One approach to, (well what I think your usecase might be...) is to
u
Take a look at the clustering component
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/ClusteringComponent
Consider clustering off line and indexing the pre calculated group memberships
I might be wrong but I don't think their is any faceting mileage here.
Depending upon the use case
you might get some use out of
Vazquez,
Sorry I don't have an answer but I'd love to know what you need this for :-)
I think the logic is going to have to bleed into your search app. In
short copy field and your app knows which to search in.
lee c
On 30 April 2012 20:41, Erick Erickson wrote:
> OK, I took another look at w
Your example are not synonyms so i don't think synonyms.txt by itself
is going to work.
This sounds like tagging using a taxonomy. Values written to the field
storing this taxonomy could be like:
livingthing/animal/cat [doc about cats]
livingthing/animal/dog [doc about dogs]
livingthing/animal [do
Have you looked at external fields?
http://lucidworks.lucidimagination.com/display/solr/Solr+Field+Types#SolrFieldTypes-WorkingwithExternalFiles
you will need a process to do the counts and note the limitation of
updates only after a commit, but i think it would fit your usecase.
On 23 Febru
an it better and create field types that are more
> specific for different field contents, correct?
>
> But still, that does not explain why I have indexed this specific value
> "EHT2011-2012" and the very same value does not match anything when I
> search for it.
>
Hi You have a lot of language processing for a field which contains,
at least in your example non words.
Do you need the synonyms, two lots of stemming, etc
what is the field for?
>>" I don't believe that this last point is what actually causes
>> my unsatisfactory results"
it probably is
Does the stats component cache. If not what are the alternatives for
finding Max / Min values of fields for a particular result set.
We think we are running into performance issues with the stats
component (250ms for a query when we issue a query with the stats
component on)
Cheers
"content-based recommender" so its not CF etc
and its a project so its whatever his supervisor wants.
take a look at solrj should be more natural to integrate your java code with.
(Although not sure if it supports termv ector comp)
good luck
On 26 January 2012 17:27, Walter Underwood wrote:
on selection issue another query to get your additional data (if i
follow what you want)
On 22 January 2012 18:53, Dave wrote:
> I take it from the overwhelming silence on the list that what I've asked is
> not possible? It seems like the suggester component is not well supported
> or understood,
check your defaultOperator, ensure its OR
On 23 January 2012 05:56, jawedshamshedi wrote:
> Hi
> Thanks for the reply..
> I am using NGramFilterFactory for this. But it's not working as desired.
> Like I have a field article_type that has been indexed using the below
> mentioned field type.
>
>
> Does
> that make more sense?
Ah I see.
I'm not certain but take a look at pivot faceting
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-792
cheers lee c
if "type" is a field use field faceting with an fq
q=datefield:[start TO end]&fq=type:(a b c)&facet.field=type
On 14 January 2012 17:56, Jamie Johnson wrote:
> I'm trying to figure out a way to execute a query which would allow me
> to say there were x documents over this period of time with
You could use a synonyms file for the alternative names. That way you
do not need to store only index the alternatives.
For faceting use a field were the analysis chain does not use the
synonyms filter. For search the analysis chain will.
You also get the benefit of only storing the normative value
only one field can be a default. use copy field and copy the fields
you need to search into a single field and set the copy field to be
the default. That might be ok depending upon your circumstances
On 25 November 2011 12:46, kiran.bodigam wrote:
> In my schema i have defined below tag for index
do your docs have daily availability ?
if so you could index each doc for each day (rather than have some
logic embedded in your data)
so instead of doc1 (1/9/2011 - 5/9/2011)
you have
doc1 1/9/2011
doc1 2/9/2011
doc1 3/9/2011
doc1 4/9/2011
doc1 5/9/2011
this makes search much easier and flexible
Take a look at facet query. You can facet on a query results not just
terms in a field
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SimpleFacetParameters#facet.query_:_Arbitrary_Query_Faceting
On 25 October 2011 10:56, Erik Hatcher wrote:
> I'm not following exactly what you're looking for here, but sounds lik
;ll be saving a bit
> on file transfers when replicating your index, but not much else.
>
> Is it worth it? If so, why?
>
> Best
> Erick
>
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:07 AM, lee carroll
> wrote:
>> Just as a follow up
>>
>> it looks like stored fields are store
this link is on he mailing list recently.
http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/dfa18d52e7e8197c/getting_answers_starting_with_a_requested_string_first#b18e9f922c1e4149
On 18 October 2011 00:59, aronitin wrote:
> Guys,
>
> It's been almost a week but there are no replies to the questi
October 2011 11:54, lee carroll wrote:
> Hi Chris thanks for the response
>
>> It's an inverted index, so *tems* exist once (per segment) and those terms
>> "point" to the documents -- so having the same terms (in the same fields)
>> for multiple types of doc
Hi Chris thanks for the response
> It's an inverted index, so *tems* exist once (per segment) and those terms
> "point" to the documents -- so having the same terms (in the same fields)
> for multiple types of documents in one index is going to take up less
> overall space then having distinct col
sorry missed the permission stuff:
I think thats ok if you index the acl as part of the document. That is
to say each version has its own acl. Match users against version acl
data
as a filter query and use last_current_at date as a sort
On 13 October 2011 22:04, lee carroll wrote:
> curr
current: bool //for fq which searches only current versions
last_current_at: date time // for date range queries or group sorting
what was current for a given date
sorry if i've missed a requirement
lee c
On 13 October 2011 15:01, Mike Sokolov wrote:
> We have the identical problem in our syste
I've prototyped a solution which makes use of multiple doc types.
Does the following have any value in terms of field value storage or
are field values saved once and pointers from other records maintained
making the below
design redundant?
we have CITY (500) and each city has many HOTEL (75000).
lib directory on 1.4.1 with multi cores
I've specified shared lib as "lib" in the solr.xml file. My assumption
being this will be the lib under solr-home.
However my cores cannot load classes from any new jar's placed in this
dir after a tomcat restart.
What am I missing ?
see
http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_4_0/api/org/apache/lucene/search/Similarity.html
On 27 September 2011 16:04, Mark wrote:
> I thought that a similarity class will only affect the scoring of a single
> field.. not across multiple fields? Can anyone else chime in with some
> input? Thanks.
>
if you have a limited set of searches which need to use this and they
act on a limited known set of fields you can concat fields at index
time and then facet
PK FLD1 FLD2FLD3 FLD4 FLD5 copy45
AB0 AB 0 x yx y
AB1 AB 1 x
Hi Chris,
That makes sense. I was behind fire wall when running both builds. I
thought I was correctly proxied - but maybe the request was being
squashed
by something else before it even got to the firewall.
I've just ran tests again but this time outside of fire wall and all pass.
Thanks a lot
Not sure if this has progressed further but I'm getting test failure
for 3.3 also.
Trunk builds and tests fine but 3.3 fails the test below
(Note i've a new box so could be a silly set up issue i've missed but
i think everything is in place (latest version of java 1.6, latest
version of ant)
I don't think solr conforms to ACID type behaviours for its queries.
This is not to say your use-case is not important
just that its not SOLR's focus. I think its a interesting question but
the solution is probably going to involve rolling your own.
Something like returning 1 user docs and cac
Hi This looks like a facteing problem.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrFacetingOverview
cheers lee c
On 22 August 2011 11:52, tom135 wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I want to use Solr as a search engine. I have indexed data like:
> ID | TEXT | CREATION_DATE
>
> Daily increase by 500 000 rows.
>
> My pr
nd
> 2)
>
> I am also considering to concatenate Text columns and have the index like
> this:
>
> BookID PageTexts
> 1 "some text some text some text"
> 2 "some text some text some text"
>
> I wonder which index st
It really does depend upon what you want to do in your app but from
the info given I'd go for denormalizing by repeating the least number
of values. So in your case that would be book
PageID+BookID(uniqueKey), pageID, PageVal1, PageValn, BookID, BookName
On 10 August 2011 09:46, directorscott
Hi I might be wrong as I've not tried it out to be sure but from the wiki docs:
These parameters may be combined in any way.
Example of generateWordParts="1" and catenateWords="1":
"PowerShot" -> 0:"Power", 1:"Shot" 1:"PowerShot"
(where 0,1,1 are token positions)
does that fit the bill ?
On 9 A
Hi
Do Stored field values get added to the index for each document field
combination literally or is a pointer used ?
I've been reading http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_4_0/fileformats.pdf
and I think thats the case but not 100% so thought I'd ask.
In logical terms for stored fields do we get this
Hi Gabriele,
Did you index any docs with your new field ?
The results will just bring back docs and what fields they have. They won't
bring back "null" fields just because they are in your schema. Lucene
is schema-less.
Solr adds the schema to make it nice to administer and very powerful to use.
Hi Filype,
in the response you should have a list of fq arguments something like
field:facetValue
field:FacetValue
use this to set your inputs to be selected / checked
On 29 June 2011 23:54, Filype Pereira wrote:
> Hi all,
> I am looking for some help in building a front end facet filter us
hi
I'm looking at setting up multi core indices but also have an exiting
index. Can I run
this index along side new index set up as cores. On a dev machine
I've experimented with
simply adding solr.xml in slor home and listing the new cores in the
cores element but this breaks the existing
index.
Hi Tod,
A list of keywords would be fine in a non multi valued field:
keywords : "xxx yyy sss aaa "
multi value field would allow you to repeat the field when indexing
keywords: "xxx"
keywords: "yyy"
keywords: "sss"
etc
On 27 June 2011 16:13, Tod wrote:
> This was a little curious to me a
Hi Markus
I've seen similar issue before (but not with solr) when processing files as xml.
In our case the problem was due to processing a utf16 file with a byte
order mark. This presents itself as
0x to the xml parser which is not used by utf8 (the bom unicode
would be represented as efbfbf i
Is it possible that synonyms are being added (synonym expansion) or at
least changing
the field length. I've saw this before. Check what exactly what terms
have been added.
On 23 June 2011 22:50, Alexander Ramos Jardim
wrote:
> Yes, I am using synonims in index time.
>
> 2011/6/
Hi Roy,
You have no relationship between time and date due to the
de-normalising of your data.
I don't have a good answer to this and I guess this is a "classic" question.
One approach is maybe to do the following:
make sure you have field collapsing available. trunk or a patch maybe
index not
s a
> facetvalue to the user.
> The same thing goed for the facets that are related to family doctors. They
> are returned as well, thus making it even moren unclear for the end-user.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:27 PM, lee carroll
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Bill,
>>
Hi are you using synonyms ?
On 22 June 2011 10:30, Alexander Ramos Jardim
wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I am getting some doubts about how to correctly understand the debugQuery
> output. I have a field named itemName in my index. This is a text field,
> just that. When I quqery a simple ?q=itemName:iP
Hi Bill,
>So that part works. Then when I output the facet, I need a different
>behavior than the default. I need
>The facet to only output the value that matches (scored) - NOT ALL VALUES
>in the multiValued field.
>I think it makes sense?
Why do you need this ? If your use case is faceted navi
Hi Bill, can you explain a little bit more around why you need this.
Knowing the motivation
might suggest a different solution not just involving faceting.
On 22 June 2011 08:49, Bill Bell wrote:
> You can type q=cardiology and match on cardiologist. If stemming did not
> work you can just add
Oh sorry forgot to also type:
Often facet fields are not stemmed or heavily analysed. The facet
values are from the index.
On 22 June 2011 08:21, lee carroll wrote:
> Can your front end app normalize the q parameter. Either with a drop
> down or a type a head derived from the values
Can your front end app normalize the q parameter. Either with a drop
down or a type a head derived from the values in the specialties
field. that way q will match value(s) in your facet results. I'm not
sure what you are trying to achieve though so maybe i'm off the mark.
On 22 June 2011 04:37,
1 - 100 of 176 matches
Mail list logo
