Goodness me, woops, yes, it was a typo -- sorry fo the confusion. We're
indeed exploring qf, rather than pf! :). So far it's looking promising!
Thanks for your eagle-eye spotting!
Best,
Edd
Edward Turner
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 at 13:15, Erick Erickson
wrote:
> Probably a typ
Probably a typo but I think you mean qf rather than pf?
They’re both actually valid, but pf is “phrase field” which will give different
results….
Best,
Erick
> On Aug 12, 2020, at 5:26 AM, Edward Turner wrote:
>
> Many thanks for your suggestions.
>
> We do use edismax and bq fields to help
Many thanks for your suggestions.
We do use edismax and bq fields to help with our result ranking, but we'd
never thought about using it for this purpose (we were stuck on the
copyfield pattern + df pattern). This is a good suggestion though thank you.
We're now exploring the use of the pf field
Have you explored edismax?
> On Aug 11, 2020, at 10:34 AM, Alexandre Rafalovitch
> wrote:
>
> I can't remember if field aliasing works with df but it may be worth a try:
>
> https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_1/the-extended-dismax-query-parser.html#field-aliasing-using-per-field-qf-overrid
I can't remember if field aliasing works with df but it may be worth a try:
https://lucene.apache.org/solr/guide/8_1/the-extended-dismax-query-parser.html#field-aliasing-using-per-field-qf-overrides
Another example:
https://github.com/arafalov/solr-indexing-book/blob/master/published/languages/co
Hi David,
We tried using copyfields, and we can get this to work, but it's not
exactly what we want because we need to use a common type. E.g.,
Then if our "df" is specified as the "content" field, we can search over
"
why not use a copyfield for indexing?
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 9:59 AM Edward Turner wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Is it possible to have multiple "df" fields? (We think the answer is no
> because our experiments did not work when adding multiple "df" values to
> solrconfig.xml -- but we just wanted to do
