On 26/08/15 18:05, Erick Erickson wrote:
> bq: my dog
> has fleas
> I wouldn't want some variant of "og ha" to match,
>
> Here's where the mysterious "positionIncrementGap" comes in. If you
> make this field "multiValued", and index this like this:
>
> my dog
> has fleas
>
>
> then the positi
analysis tab does not support multi-valued fields. It only analyses a
single field value.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015, at 05:05 PM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> bq: my dog
> has fleas
> I wouldn't want some variant of "og ha" to match,
>
> Here's where the mysterious "positionIncrementGap" comes in. If you
bq: my dog
has fleas
I wouldn't want some variant of "og ha" to match,
Here's where the mysterious "positionIncrementGap" comes in. If you
make this field "multiValued", and index this like this:
my dog
has fleas
or equivalently in SolrJ just
doc.addField("blah", "my dog");
doc.addField("blah
On 26/08/15 00:24, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Hmmm, this sounds like a nonsensical question, but "what do you mean
> by arbitrary substring"?
>
> Because if your substrings consist of whole _tokens_, then ngramming
> is totally unnecessary (and gets in the way). Phrase queries with no slop
> fulfill
Hmmm, this sounds like a nonsensical question, but "what do you mean
by arbitrary substring"?
Because if your substrings consist of whole _tokens_, then ngramming
is totally unnecessary (and gets in the way). Phrase queries with no slop
fulfill this requirement.
But let's assume you need to march
Hi
I'm trying to build an index for technical documents that basically
works like "grep", i.e. the user gives an arbitray substring somewhere
in a line of a document and the exact matches will be returned. I
specifically want no stemming etc. and keep all whitespace, parentheses
etc. because they
