: However, even when it's set to 'false' , the highlighting of a field
: continues to work even if the search doesn't.
: Does the highlighter use a different strategy to match the query terms
: in the fields?
if it has term vectors, it uses them, otherwise it re analyzes the stored
fields.
-Ho
Mea maxima culpa,
I had foolishly set the option omitTermFreqAndPositions="false" in an
attempt to save space.
It works when this is set to 'true'.
However, even when it's set to 'false' , the highlighting of a field
continues to work even if the search doesn't.
Does the highlighter use a differ
Actually here is the difference between the textgen analysis pipeline and our:
For the phrase "ingenieur d'affaire senior" ,
Our pipeline gives right after our tokenizer:
term position 1 2 3 4
term text ingenieur d affaire senior
'd' and 'affaire' are separa
Hum,
That's probably because of our own customized types/tokenizers/filters.
I tried reindexing and querying our data using the default solr type
'textgen' and it works fine.
I need to investigate which features of the new lucene 2.9 API is not
implemented in our own tokenizers etc...
Thanks.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Jérôme Etévé wrote:
> I don't really get why these two tokens are subsequently put together
> in a phrase query.
That's the way the Lucene query parser has always worked... phrase
queries are made if multiple tokens are produced from one field query.
> In solr 1.
Hi All,
I'm using a multified query parser to generated weighted queries
across different fields.
For instance, perl developer gives me:
+(title:perl^10.0 keywords:perl company:perl^3.0)
+(title:developer^10.0 keywords:developer company:developer^3.0)
Either in solr 1.3 or solr 1.4 (from 12 oct
