Hi,
Thank you for your help. The issue is now resolved after using analysis
tool as suggested by Jack and Chris. We used the following filters in the
end for this field:
WordDelimiterFilterFactory does the tric
: After further analysis it was found that the cases in which the search
: works as expected are where the "." is preceded by a number. Whenever, we
: have an alphabet instead of number, the search on the word on right side
: doesn't return results.
Please note Jack's previous suggestion...
>> T
Sorry, a correction. The first part doesn't give results.
SA8182B.BA0850 --> Will have issues when searching on SA8182 -- no
results. searching on BA0850 will give results.
SA8182.BA0850 --> No issues will return results for BA0850 and SA8182.
Regards,
Sohail
Hi,
After further analysis it was found that the cases in which the search
works as expected are where the "." is preceded by a number. Whenever, we
have an alphabet instead of number, the search on the word on right side
doesn't return results.
SA8182B.BA0850 --> Will have issues when searching
Hello!
I suggest you to try PatternTokenizer with a regex that includes "." and
blank spaces, for example, in Query and Index analyzers for that fieldType.
The expression will be tokenized by that regex expression and you will
success querying. Unfortunately, you will have to reindex all if you ch
Try the Solr Admin Analysis page and see how your failing examples analyze
for both index and query.
Also, if you experiment with analyzer settings, be sure to FULLY reindex
your documents since a mismatch between how the documents were ORIGINALLY
analyzed and the latest query analysis can cau
Am 27.06.2011 15:56, schrieb Jihed Amine Maaref:
> - normalizedContents:(EDOUAR* AND une) doesn't return anything
This was discussed few days ago:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Conflict-in-wildcard-query-and-spellchecker-in-solr-search-tt3095198.html
> - normalizedContents:(edouar* AND un)
Stéphane Corlosquet wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm new to solr so please let me know if there is a more appropriate place
> for my question below.
>
> I'm noticing a rather unexpected number of results when I add more keywords
> to a search. I'm listing below a example (where I replaced the real keywor
sorry, mm was set to 2<-35%, not 2->25%, but nevermind.
Steph.
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Stéphane Corlosquet
wrote:
> Thank you Erick, Markus and Ahmet! That answered my question. Changing the
> value of the mm parameter in solrconfig.xml did have an effect on the 3
> keyword query (it was
Thank you Erick, Markus and Ahmet! That answered my question. Changing the
value of the mm parameter in solrconfig.xml did have an effect on the 3
keyword query (it was set to 2->25%), and removing it entirely forced all
keywords to be present, and the number of hits was decreasing as expected.
I'
Indeed, it's the dismax, i missed it! My bad..
-Original message-
From: Ahmet Arslan
Sent: Thu 09-09-2010 20:37
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org;
Subject: Re: Inconsistent search results with multiple keywords
> yes, my schema.xml file have defaultOperator="AND"/
> yes, my schema.xml file have defaultOperator="AND"/> which
> is why I thought that the number of hits would decrease
> every time you add a
> keyword.
You are using dismax so, it is determined by mm parameter.
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DisMaxQParserPlugin#mm_.28Minimum_.27Should.27_Match.29
Hi Markus,
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Markus Jelsma wrote:
> Looks like AND is your defaultOperator [1].
yes, my schema.xml file have which
is why I thought that the number of hits would decrease every time you add a
keyword.
> Check your schema.xml and try
> adding q.op=or to your qu
Hi Erick,
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Could you show us the definitions for your fields? I suspect
> you're not getting the tokens you expect. This will almost certainly
> be true if the type is "string" rather than "text".
>
I should mention that I use solr via the
Looks like AND is your defaultOperator [1]. Check your schema.xml and try
adding q.op=or to your query.
[1]: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SearchHandler#q.op
On Thursday 09 September 2010 15:34:52 Stéphane Corlosquet wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm new to solr so please let me know if there is a more a
Could you show us the definitions for your fields? I suspect
you're not getting the tokens you expect. This will almost certainly
be true if the type is "string" rather than "text".
The solr admin page (especially analysis) will help you a lot here, as
will adding &debugQuery=on to your query and
16 matches
Mail list logo
