: We have a listing aggregator that gets product listings from a lot of
: different sites and since they are added in batches, sometimes you see a
: lot of pages from the same source (site). We are working on some changes to
: shift things around and reduce this "blocking" effect, so we can presen
> This document already has a field that indicates the source
> (site).
> The issue we are trying to solve is when we list all
> documents without any
> specific criteria. Since we bring the most recent ones and
> the ones that
> contains images, we end up having a lot of listings from a
> single s
Michael,
We are using the random sorting in combination with date and other fields
but I am trying to change this to affect the ranking instead of sorting
directly.
That way we can also use other useful tweaks on the rank itself.
Alexandre
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Michael Kuhlmann wrot
Does the random sort function help you here?
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/api/org/apache/solr/schema/RandomSortField.html
However, you will get some very old listings then, if it's okay for you.
-Kuli
Am 12.01.2012 14:38, schrieb Alexandre Rocco:
Erick,
This document already has a field tha
Erick,
This document already has a field that indicates the source (site).
The issue we are trying to solve is when we list all documents without any
specific criteria. Since we bring the most recent ones and the ones that
contains images, we end up having a lot of listings from a single site,
sin
I think the OP meant to use random order in the case of score ties.
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Alexandre:
>
> Have you thought about grouping? If you can analyze the incoming
> documents and include a field such that "similar" documents map
> to the same value, than
Alexandre:
Have you thought about grouping? If you can analyze the incoming
documents and include a field such that "similar" documents map
to the same value, than group on that value you'll get output that
isn't dominated by repeated copies of the "similar" documents. It
depends, though, on being
Erick,
Probably I really written something silly. You are right on either sorting
by field or ranking.
I just need to change the ranking to shift things around as you said.
To clarify the use case:
We have a listing aggregator that gets product listings from a lot of
different sites and since the
I really don't understand what this means:
"random sorting for the records but also preserving the ranking"
Either you're sorting on rank or you're not. If you mean you're
trying to shift things around just a little bit, *mostly* respecting
relevance then I guess you can do what you're thinking.
