On 6/15/2020 8:01 AM, Webster Homer wrote:
Only the minus following the parenthesis is treated as a NOT.
Are parentheses special? They're not mentioned in the eDismax documentation.
Yes, parentheses are special to edismax. They are used just like in
math equations, to group and separate thing
max
> documentation.
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: Markus Jelsma
> Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2020 4:57 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: eDismax query syntax question
>
> Hello,
>
> These are special characters, if you don't ne
tation.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Markus Jelsma
> Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2020 4:57 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: eDismax query syntax question
>
> Hello,
>
> These are special characters, if you don't need th
--
From: Markus Jelsma
Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2020 4:57 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: eDismax query syntax question
Hello,
These are special characters, if you don't need them, you must escape them.
See top of the article:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_5/the
Hello,
These are special characters, if you don't need them, you must escape them.
See top of the article:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_5/the-extended-dismax-query-parser.html
Markus
-Original message-
> From:Webster Homer
> Sent: Friday 12th June 2020 22:09
> To: solr-u
Thanks for the support Erick. Not using the “qf" parameter at all seems to give
me valid query results now. The query debug information:
"debug":{ "rawquerystring":"claims_en:(An English sentence) description_en:(An
English sentence) claims_de:(Ein Deutscher Satz) description_de:(Ein Deutscher
Let’s see the results of adding &debug=query to the query, in particular the
parsed version.
Because what you’re reporting doesn’t really make sense. edismax should be
totally
ignoring the “qf” parameter since you’re specifically qualifying all the
clauses with
a field. Unless you’re not really
parameter or so it seems. No need to change mm in solrconfig nor adding
> > mm
> > > as a query parameter.
> > >
> > > Particularly, I would go with either 2) or 3).
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Edward
> > >
> > > On Th
s, so
removing it from the solrconfig isn't possible.
I'll let you know how I get on, might be a little while until I get some
results, but thank you again!
Cheers,
Claire.
-Original Message-
From: Edward Ribeiro
Sent: 10 January 2020 05:16
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subje
seems. No need to change mm in solrconfig nor adding
> mm
> > as a query parameter.
> >
> > Particularly, I would go with either 2) or 3).
> >
> > Best,
> > Edward
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 7:47 AM Claire Pollard
> > wrote:
&g
e issue with
> ))~2
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8812
> >
> > mm is set at config, but not explicitly in the query...
> >
> > I can see this is a change to default behaviour, but does it mean I
> should be passing mm in the quer
; -Original Message-
> From: Claire Pollard
> Sent: 09 January 2020 10:23
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Edismax ignoring queries containing booleans
>
> Hey Edward,
>
> Thanks for the tips.
>
> I've cleaned up my solrconfig, removed th
y now rather than just at config level?
-Original Message-
From: Claire Pollard
Sent: 09 January 2020 10:23
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Edismax ignoring queries containing booleans
Hey Edward,
Thanks for the tips. 😊
I've cleaned up my solrconfig, removed the duplicat
the parsed query:
Old Query start: +((recordID:[18 TO 18]) (recordID:[19 TO 19]) (recordID:[20 TO
20]))~2
New Query start: +((recordID:[18 TO 18]) (recordID:[19 TO 19]) (recordID:[20 TO
20]))
There shouldn't be a problem using mm with edismax right? Or does the problem
lie with the structure
> "explain":{},
> "QParser":"ExtendedDismaxQParser",
> "altquerystring":null,
> "boost_queries":null,
> "parsed_boost_queries":[],
> "boostfuncs":[""],
> "timing&
"boostfuncs":[""],
"timing":{
"time":75.0,
"prepare":{
"time":35.0,
"query":{
"time":35.0},
"facet":{
"time":0.0},
"facet_modul
in helping diagnose what's
going wrong for me?
>
> Cheers,
> Claire.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Saurabh Sharma
> Sent: 06 January 2020 11:20
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Edismax ignoring queries containing booleans
>
> It shou
ong for me?
Cheers,
Claire.
-Original Message-
From: Saurabh Sharma
Sent: 06 January 2020 11:20
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Edismax ignoring queries containing booleans
It should work well. I have just tested the same with 8.3.0.
Thanks
Saurabh Sharma
On Mon, Jan 6, 2020, 4:
is a LongPointField (sorry I said Int in my previous message).
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Saurabh Sharma
> Sent: 06 January 2020 10:35
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Edismax ignoring queries containing booleans
>
> Please share the query whic
apache.org
Subject: Re: Edismax ignoring queries containing booleans
Please share the query which you are creating.
On Mon, Jan 6, 2020, 3:52 PM Claire Pollard
wrote:
> In Solr 8.3.0 I've got an edismax query parser in my search handler,
> and it seems to be ignoring Boolean operato
Please share the query which you are creating.
On Mon, Jan 6, 2020, 3:52 PM Claire Pollard
wrote:
> In Solr 8.3.0 I've got an edismax query parser in my search handler, and
> it seems to be ignoring Boolean operators such as AND and OR when searching
> using an IntPointField.
>
> I was hoping to
;t get the documents with
default score equal to 1.0
-Original Message-
From: Raboah, Avi [mailto:avi.rab...@verint.com]
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2019 2:09 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: RE: Edismax bq(boost query) with filter range on score
I am using solr 7.6.0 and I try to
I am using solr 7.6.0 and I try to check the incl and incu I get the same
result for true or false
-Original Message-
From: Paras Lehana [mailto:paras.leh...@indiamart.com]
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2019 1:31 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Edismax bq(boost query) with
ore between (1.0 < score < 4.0) although
> lower bound equal to 0.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Paras Lehana [mailto:paras.leh...@indiamart.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 09, 2019 11:51 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Edi
bq)&q=*:*&rows=2000
I get all the documents with score between (1.0 < score < 4.0) although lower
bound equal to 0.
Thanks.
-Original Message-
From: Paras Lehana [mailto:paras.leh...@indiamart.com]
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2019 11:51 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
December 09, 2019 7:08 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Edismax bq(boost query) with filter range on score
>
> Hi Raboah,
>
> What do you mean by filter range? Please post expected result. Do you want
> to put an fq on the score?
>
> On Sun, 8 Dec 201
r 09, 2019 7:08 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Edismax bq(boost query) with filter range on score
Hi Raboah,
What do you mean by filter range? Please post expected result. Do you want to
put an fq on the score?
On Sun, 8 Dec 2019 at 17:54, Raboah, Avi wrote:
> Hi,
>
&
Hi Raboah,
What do you mean by filter range? Please post expected result. Do you want
to put an fq on the score?
On Sun, 8 Dec 2019 at 17:54, Raboah, Avi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In order to use solr boost mechanism for specific text I use the bq field
> under deftype=edisMax.
>
> For example -
> q=*:*
hi
On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 09:40:43AM +0100, Jan Høydahl wrote:
> q=kind:animal&wantedweight=50&sort=abs(sub(weight,wantedweight)) asc
*sort function* looks a great way.
I did not mention very clearly I d'like to use edsimax and add some
weight to some fields (such *description* in the below exa
q=kind:animal&wantedweight=50&sort=abs(sub(weight,wantedweight)) asc
Jan Høydahl
> 16. feb. 2019 kl. 17:08 skrev Dave :
>
> Sounds like you need to use code and post process your results as it sounds
> too specific to your use case. Just my opinion, unless you want to get into
> spacial querie
Sounds like you need to use code and post process your results as it sounds too
specific to your use case. Just my opinion, unless you want to get into spacial
queries which is a whole different animal and something I don’t think many have
experience with, including myself
> On Feb 16, 2019, a
Well, you haven't defined "distance" so it's hard to say. But what you
_probably_ want is
to sort by function. See:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/6_6/function-queries.html
Best,
Erick
On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 7:19 AM Nicolas Paris wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Thanks.
> To clarify, I don't want to sor
Hi
Thanks.
To clarify, I don't want to sort by numeric fields, instead, I d'like to
get sort by distance to my query.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 06:20:19PM -0500, Gus Heck wrote:
> Hi Niclolas,
>
> Solr has no difficulty sorting on numeric fields if they are indexed as a
> numeric type. Just use "
Hi Niclolas,
Solr has no difficulty sorting on numeric fields if they are indexed as a
numeric type. Just use "&sort=weight asc" If you're field is indexed as
text of course it won't sort properly, but then you should fix your schema.
-Gus
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 4:10 PM David Hastings
wrote:
Not clearly understanding your question here. if your query is
q=kind:animal weight:50 you will get no results, as nothing matches
(assuming a q.op of AND)
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 4:06 PM Nicolas Paris
wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have a numeric field (say "weight") and I d'like to be able to get
> resul
Well, the other option is to allow leading wildcards, but use
ReversedWildcardFilterFactory. Admittedly that increases the size of
your index, but apparently your users expect leading wildcards so why
not support them?
Best,
Erick
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 6:58 AM Kudrettin Güleryüz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
Hi,
I am also wondering how to disable leading wildcards in Solr. Can you
please suggest how to disable leading wildcards in Solr? I know in Lucene
it is a flag that's set to false by default.
> Do it on the client side. Just don't allow leading asterisks or question
marks in your query term.
Th
Followup:
I had a theory that Nicky tested, and I think what was observed confirms the
theory.
TL;DR:
In previous versions, I think there was a bug where the presence of boolean
operators caused edismax to ignore the mm parameter, and only rely on the
boolean operator(s).
After that bug got
Hi,
What is your full query path or URL that you pass for the query?
And how is your setting like for the edismax in your solrconfig.xml?
Regards,
Edwin
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 06:24, Nicky Mastin wrote:
>
> Oddity with edismax and queries involving boolean operators. Here's the
> "parsedquery
Ok, I thought that it was somehow expected, but what bothers me is that if
I use min and max = 2 or min and max = 3, it grows linearly, but when I
change to min = 2 and max = 3, the number of tokens explode.
What I expect it was going to do was to make first the 2 shingles clauses
and after the 3
This is doing exactly what it should. It'd be a little clearer if you
used a tokenSeparator other than the default space. Then this line:
text_shingles:word1 word2 word3+text_shingles:word4 word5
would look more like this:
text_shingles:word1_word2_word3+text_shingles:word4_word5
It's building a
Am 22.12.2017 um 11:57 schrieb Selvam Raman:
> 1) how can i disable leading wildcard search
Do it on the client side. Just don't allow leading asterisks or question
marks in your query term.
> 2) why leading wildcard search takes so much of time to give the response.
>
Because Lucene can't just
: ok. Shouldn't pf be applied on top of bq=? that way among the object_types
: boosted, if one has "Manufacturing" then it should be listed first?
No.
bq is an *additive* boost ... documents must match your "main query" to be
included, but if document X scores very high against the bq query, an
I was asking about the field definitions from the schema.
It would also be helpful to see the debug info from the query. Just add
debug=true to see how the query and params were executed by solr and how
the calculation was done for each result.
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 1:33 PM ruby wrote:
> ok.
ok. Shouldn't pf be applied on top of bq=? that way among the object_types
boosted, if one has "Manufacturing" then it should be listed first?
following are my objects:
1
Configuration
typeA
Manufacturing
<--catch all field where contents of all fields get
copied to
2
Manufacturing
typeA
xy
What's the analysis configuration for the object_name field and fieldType?
Perhaps the query is matching your catch-all field, but not the object_name
field, and therefore the pf boost never happens.
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 8:55 AM ruby wrote:
> I'm noticing in my following query bq= is takin
The problem is that the ${q} macro syntax is interpreted by Solr as a Java
Property. Thus these two syntaxes conflict when we encode the macro
substitution into the solrconfig.xml. See
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Configuring+solrconfig.xml
The way to escape seems to be to indi
Hi,
I am in the middle of the similar use case as provided , we have three
different fields on UI for searchany, searchall and searchexcept
respectively for OR,AND and NOT query , I need to know how do I make them
work along with Edismax.
We can expect any/all of the fields to have free text.
Any
Hi,
Ideally it should but from the debug query it seems like it is not
respecting Boolean clauses.
Anyone else could help here? Is this the ideal behavior?
On Jul 31, 2017 5:47 PM, "Niraj Aswani" wrote:
> Hi Aman,
>
> Thank you very much your reply.
>
> Let me elaborate my question a bit more
Hi Aman,
Thank you very much your reply.
Let me elaborate my question a bit more using your example in this case.
AFAIK, what the pf2 parameter is doing to the query is adding the following
phrase queries:
(_text_:"system memory") (_text_:"memory oem") (_text_:"oem retail")
There are three phr
Hi Niraj,
Should I expect it to check the following bigram phrases?
Yes it will check.
ex- documents & query is given below
http://localhost:8983/solr/myfile/select?wt=xml&fl=name&indent=on&q=*System
AND Memory AND (OEM OR Retail)*&rows=50&wt=json&*qf=_text_&pf2=_text_*
&debug=true&defType=edis
Michael,
I assume you were trying his out in the SolrAdmin Query tab? With the
debug=true flag set? What do you see in the debug output about scoring?
You might end up using a Boost Function to get the desired ranking.
Google "solr multiple boost functions".
cheers -- Rick
On 2017-05-29 0
Try declaring your mm as 1 then and see if that assumption is correct.
Default 'mm' values are complicated to describe and depend on a variety of
factors. Generally if you want it to be a certain value, just declare it.
On 5 April 2017 at 02:07, Abhishek Mishra wrote:
> Hello guys
> sorry for la
Hello guys
sorry for late response. @steve I am using solr 5.2 .
@greg i am using default mm from config file(According to me it is default
mm is 1).
Regards,
Abhishek
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Greg Pendlebury
wrote:
> eDismax uses 'mm', so knowing what that has been set to is important,
eDismax uses 'mm', so knowing what that has been set to is important, or if
it has been left unset/default you would need to consider whether 'q.op'
has been set. Or the default operator from the config file.
Ta,
Greg
On 3 April 2017 at 23:56, Steve Rowe wrote:
> Hi Abhishek,
>
> Which version
Hi Abhishek,
Which version of Solr are you using?
I can see that the parsed queries are different, but they’re also very similar,
and there’s a lot of detail there - can you be more specific about what the
problem is?
--
Steve
www.lucidworks.com
> On Apr 3, 2017, at 4:54 AM, Abhishek Mishra
Hi Greg,
Your analysis is SPOT ON. I did some debugging and found out that we had
q.op in the default set to AND. And when I changed that to OR, things
worked exactly as in Solr 4. So, it seemed Solr 6 was behaving as is
should. What I could not explain was whether Solr 4 was using the
configured
This has come up a lot on the lists lately. Keep in mind that edismax
parses your query uses additional parameters such as 'mm' and 'q.op'. It is
the handling of these parameters (and the selection of default values)
which has changed between versions to address a few functionality gaps.
The most
Hi Stefan, I've been very busy today, I've read your mail but no time to
write an answer.
So now at last, finally everybody is sleeping around me :)
Let's start from the very beginning, sorry if I didn't get everything about
your first question, I just got you're unable to find the phone number wh
Any more thoughts on this? The longer i look at this situation, the
more i’m thinking i’m at fault here - expection something that isn’t
to be expected at all?
Whatever is on your mind once you’ve read mail - don’t keep to it, let me know.
-Stefan
On November 7, 2016 at 5:23:58 PM, Stefan Mathe
Which is everything fine by itself - but doesn’t shed more light on my
initial question Vincenzo, does it? probably i shoudn’t have mentioned
partial matches in the first place, that might have lead into the
wrong direction - they are not relevant for now / not for this
question.
I’d like to know
If you don't want partial matches with edismax you should always use
StandardTokenizerFactory and play with mm parameter.
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Stefan Matheis
wrote:
> Vincenzo,
>
> thanks for the response - i know that only the Keyword Tokenizer by
> itself does not do anything. as po
Vincenzo,
thanks for the response - i know that only the Keyword Tokenizer by
itself does not do anything. as pointed at the end of the initial
mail, i’m applying a pattern replace for everything non-numeric to
make it actually useful.
and especially because of the tokenization based on whitespac
Hi Stefan,
I think the problem is solr.KeywordTokenizerFactory.
This tokeniser does not make any tokenisation to the string, it returns
exactly what you have.
'+49 1234 12345678' -> '+49 1234 12345678'
On the other hand, using edismax you are looking for '+49', '1234' and
'12345678' and none of
Please read the last example in my previous mail as follows:
*Query: fl1:/netw.{0,4}/*
"parsedquery_toString": "+fl1:/netw.{0,4}/"
Basically the regex query is getting analyzed only for alias fields.
Thanks,
Modassar
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Modassar Ather
wrote:
> Thanks Anil and Er
Thanks Anil and Erik for your response.
“f.fl.qf” is not a recognized Solr parameter.
Please note that in f.fl.qf the fl is just used as an example alias name.
f.fl.qf is alias of four fields as defined below for fl1,fl2,fl3 and fl4.
This is as per edismax specification.
fl1 fl2 fl3 fl4
Please le
“f.fl.qf” is not a recognized Solr parameter. Please provide the full
(debug=true) response from Solr so we can see how the query is being parsed.
Erik
> On Jun 27, 2016, at 6:41 AM, Modassar Ather wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a qf defined as follows:
>
> *fl1 fl2 fl3 fl4*
> These are
if I remember it correctly, regex is not supported with Edismax.
On 29 June 2016 at 10:11, Modassar Ather wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Any input will be really helpful.
>
> Regards,
> Modassar
>
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Modassar Ather
> wrote:
>
> > Kindly provide your inputs.
> >
> > Thanks,
>
Hi,
Any input will be really helpful.
Regards,
Modassar
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Modassar Ather
wrote:
> Kindly provide your inputs.
>
> Thanks,
> Modassar
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Modassar Ather
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a qf defined as follows:
>>
>> *fl1 fl2 fl3 fl
Kindly provide your inputs.
Thanks,
Modassar
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Modassar Ather
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a qf defined as follows:
>
> *fl1 fl2 fl3 fl4*
> These are all text fields.
>
> When I query *fl:/netw.{0,4}/ *I see the parsed query contains all the
> possible analyzed tokens
Fields that don't match for a particular document just don't contribute to the
score. The boost is multiplied into the score calculated for that field and
term. So if for doc1 the calculated score is 5 and you boost by 2, the result is
10. If doc2 has a calculated score of 20 and you boost by 1, it
Correcting typo in original post and making it a little clearer
Hi
Can someone help us understand how null values affect boosting.
Say we have field_1 (with boost ^10.1) and field_2 (with boost ^9.1).
We search for foo.
Document A : field_1 : does not exist
Field_2 =
It does not work with comma as well. In fact, no DisjunctionMaxQuery is added
for any of pf fields if I add comma.
(+((DisjunctionMaxQuery((P_NAME:refriger^1.5 |
CategoryName:refrigerator)~1.0) DisjunctionMaxQuery((P_NAME:water^1.5 |
CategoryName:water)~1.0) DisjunctionMaxQuery((P_NAME:filter^1.5
Try comma instead of space delimiting?
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Senthil wrote:
> Clarification needed on edismax query parser "pf" field.
>
> *SOLR Query:*
> /query?q=refrigerator water filter&qf=P_NAME^1.5
> CategoryName&wt=xml&debugQuery=on&pf=P_NAME
> CategoryName&mm=2&fl=CategoryName
Yeah, this stuff is poorly documented, not very intuitive, and the
terminology is poorly designed in the first place, so it's completely
expected to easily get confused by it. Not even a mention of it in the Solr
reference guide.
-- Jack Krupansky
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Alessandro Bened
Hi Shawn,
thank you very much!
I was thinking the debug "parsed query" was showing the "post parsing, pre
analysis" queries.
But actually it shows the post analysis.
Cheers
On 24 November 2015 at 17:49, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> On 11/24/2015 9:31 AM, Alessandro Benedetti wrote:
> > I was wonderin
On 11/24/2015 9:31 AM, Alessandro Benedetti wrote:
> I was wondering how can I escape the '*' character to explicitly look for
> it instead of using it as a wildcard.
> *rawquerystring*": "a\\*b",
> "*querystring*": "a\\*b",
> "*parsedquery*": "BoostedQuery(boost(+((area:a area:b) |
> ((country
On 5/20/2015 3:35 PM, John Blythe wrote:
> regarding the new question itself, i'd replied to this thread w more info
> but had the system kick it back to me for some reason. maybe i replied too
> much too soon? anyway, it ended up being a result of my query still being
> in the primary query box in
; www.curvolabs.com
> >
> > 58 Adams Ave
> > Evansville, IN 47713
> >
> > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Walter Underwood
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I was going to post the same advice. If your approach depends on absolute
> >> scores, you need
gt;
>> 58 Adams Ave
>> Evansville, IN 47713
>>
>> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Walter Underwood
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I was going to post the same advice. If your approach depends on absolute
>>> scores, you need to change your approach.
>
olute
>> scores, you need to change your approach.
>>
>> wunder
>> Walter Underwood
>> wun...@wunderwood.org
>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
>>
>>
>> On May 20, 2015, at 2:09 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
>>
>> > On 5/20/
your approach.
>
> wunder
> Walter Underwood
> wun...@wunderwood.org
> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
>
>
> On May 20, 2015, at 2:09 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
>
> > On 5/20/2015 2:54 PM, John Blythe wrote:
> >> new question re edismax: when i turn it
the wrote:
>> new question re edismax: when i turn it on (in solr admin) my score goes
>> wayy down. from 772 to 4.9.
>>
>> what in the edismax query parser would account for that huge nosedive?
>
> Scores are 100% relative, and the number only has meaning in the
On 5/20/2015 2:54 PM, John Blythe wrote:
> new question re edismax: when i turn it on (in solr admin) my score goes
> wayy down. from 772 to 4.9.
>
> what in the edismax query parser would account for that huge nosedive?
Scores are 100% relative, and the number only has me
new question re edismax: when i turn it on (in solr admin) my score goes
wayy down. from 772 to 4.9.
what in the edismax query parser would account for that huge nosedive?
--
*John Blythe*
Product Manager & Lead Developer
251.605.3071 | j...@curvolabs.com
www.curvolabs.com
58 Adams
cool, will check into it some more via testing
--
*John Blythe*
Product Manager & Lead Developer
251.605.3071 | j...@curvolabs.com
www.curvolabs.com
58 Adams Ave
Evansville, IN 47713
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Walter Underwood
wrote:
> I believe that boost is a superset of the bq funct
I believe that boost is a superset of the bq functionality.
wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
On May 20, 2015, at 1:16 PM, John Blythe wrote:
> could i do that the same way as my mention of using bq? the docs aren't
> very rich in their exa
could i do that the same way as my mention of using bq? the docs aren't
very rich in their example or explanation of boost= here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/The+Extended+DisMax+Query+Parser
thanks!
--
*John Blythe*
Product Manager & Lead Developer
251.605.3071 | j...@curvo
I highly recommend using boost= in edismax rather than bq=. The multiplicative
boost is stable with a wide range of scores. bq is additive and has problems
with high or low scores.
wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
On May 20, 2015, at 1:04
: "+(word1 word2)",
> "parsedquery": "(+(+(DisjunctionMaxQuery((title:word1))
> DisjunctionMaxQuery((title:word2)/no_coord",
> "parsedquery_toString": "+(+((title:word1) (title:word2)))",
>
> There are any changes on two queries
>
, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Davis, Daniel (NIH/NLM) [C] <
daniel.da...@nih.gov> wrote:
> Thanks Shawn,
>
> This is what I thought, but Solr often has features I don't anticipate.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Shawn Heisey [mailto:apa...@elyograg.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April
Thanks Shawn,
This is what I thought, but Solr often has features I don't anticipate.
-Original Message-
From: Shawn Heisey [mailto:apa...@elyograg.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 12:54 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: edismax operators
On 4/2/2015 9:59 AM,
On 4/2/2015 9:59 AM, Davis, Daniel (NIH/NLM) [C] wrote:
> Can the mm parameter be set per clause?I guess I've ignored it in the
> past aside from setting it once to what seemed like a reasonable value.
> That is probably replicated across every collection, which cannot be ideal
> for relevanc
> From: Shawn Heisey [mailto:apa...@elyograg.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 11:13 AM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: edismax operators
>
> On 4/2/2015 8:35 AM, Mahmoud Almokadem wrote:
>> Thank you Jack for your clarifications. I used regular defType an
o:apa...@elyograg.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2015 11:13 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: edismax operators
On 4/2/2015 8:35 AM, Mahmoud Almokadem wrote:
> Thank you Jack for your clarifications. I used regular defType and set
> q.op=AND so all terms without operators are mu
On 4/2/2015 8:35 AM, Mahmoud Almokadem wrote:
> Thank you Jack for your clarifications. I used regular defType and set
> q.op=AND so all terms without operators are must. How can I use this with
> edismax?
The edismax parser is capable of much more granularity than simply
AND/OR on the default ope
Thank you Jack for your clarifications. I used regular defType and set
q.op=AND so all terms without operators are must. How can I use this with
edismax?
Thanks,
Mahmoud
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Jack Krupansky
wrote:
> The parentheses signal a nested query. Your plus operator applies to
The parentheses signal a nested query. Your plus operator applies to the
overall nested query - that the nested query must match something. Use the
plus operator on each of the discrete terms if each of them is mandatory.
The plus and minus operators apply to the overall nested query - they do
not
15 3:04 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: edismax removes query string: (pg_int:-1) becomes ()
I would classify this behavior as a bug, even if we can explain it somehow
- it is certainly not intuitively expected.
As a workaround, try placing the -1 in quotes: (pg_int:"-1").
I would classify this behavior as a bug, even if we can explain it somehow
- it is certainly not intuitively expected.
As a workaround, try placing the -1 in quotes: (pg_int:"-1"). Or escape the
minus with a backslash: (pg_int:\-1)
Also, what is the field and field type for pg_int?
The edismax q
1 - 100 of 298 matches
Mail list logo
