apache.org
Subject: RE: Filter Question
Hi Monica,
AFAIK there is nothing like the filter you've described, and I believe it would
be generally useful. Maybe it could be called StopTermTypesFilter? (Plural on
Types to signify that more than one type of term can be stopped by a single
n like StopFilter.
>
> Steve
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Monica Skidmore [mailto:monica.skidm...@careerbuilder.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 1:04 PM
>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; Otis Gospodnetic
>> Subject: RE: Filter Question
>>
&
ilter should have an enablePositionIncrements option like StopFilter.
Steve
> -Original Message-
> From: Monica Skidmore [mailto:monica.skidm...@careerbuilder.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 1:04 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org; Otis Gospodnetic
> Subject: RE: Filter
ssage-
From: Otis Gospodnetic [mailto:otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 12:37 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Filter Question
Monica,
This is different from Solr's synonyms filter with different synonyms files,
one for index-time and the other f
Monica,
This is different from Solr's synonyms filter with different synonyms files,
one for index-time and the other for query-time expansion (not sure when you'd
want that, but it looks like you need this and like this), right? If so, maybe
you can describe what your filter does differently
Thanks Mike. I just tested it on one field and looks like it works fine.
Mike Klaas wrote:
>
> On 4/19/07, escher2k <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Jennifer. But the issue with the quotes would be that it would
>> match
>> the string exactly and
>> not find it, if there were other words
Thanks Chris. We are using dismax already :)
Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
>
> : not find it, if there were other words in between (e.g. New Capital
> Delhi).
>
> then you should use field:"New Delhi"~3 or (+field:New +field:Delhi) what
> you have now is going to match any docs that have "New" in
: not find it, if there were other words in between (e.g. New Capital Delhi).
then you should use field:"New Delhi"~3 or (+field:New +field:Delhi) what
you have now is going to match any docs that have "New" in any of the
fields you care about or Delhi in whatever you default search field is.
in
On 4/19/07, escher2k <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks Jennifer. But the issue with the quotes would be that it would match
the string exactly and
not find it, if there were other words in between (e.g. New Capital Delhi).
If you want to restrict a section of a query to a field, use brackets:
Thanks Jennifer. But the issue with the quotes would be that it would match
the string exactly and
not find it, if there were other words in between (e.g. New Capital Delhi).
Jennifer Seaman wrote:
>
>
>>Is there a way to only retrieve those records that contain both the
>>words "New" and "De
Is there a way to only retrieve those records that contain both the
words "New" and "Delhi".
I'm just starting with this, put I found you need to do;
primary_state:"New Delhi"
I never used the OR yet!
11 matches
Mail list logo
