Erick:
Well, in principle you should be able to access both q (via qstr) and fq
(via params), as the method signature tells:
createParser(String qstr, SolrParams localParams, SolrParams params,
SolrQueryRequest req)
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/4_8_1/solr-core/org/apache/solr/search/QParserPlug
Dmitry:
You have a valid point. That said I'm pretty sure you could have the
filter query use your custom parser by something like
fq={!customparser} whatever
Of course if you were doing something in your custom qparser that
needed both halves, that wouldn't work either..
Best,
Erick
On
Erick,
correct me if the following's wrong, but if you have a custom query parser
configured to preprocess your searches, you'd need to send the
corresponding bit of the search in the q= parameter, rather than fq=
parameter. In that sense, q and fq are not exactly equal.
Dmitry
On Thu, May 22,
Hmmm, not quite.
AFAIK, anything you can put in a q clause can also be put in an fq
clause. So it's not a matter of whether your search is precise or not
that you should use for determining whether to use a q or fq clause.
What _should_ influence this is whether docs that satisfy the clause
should
The *fq* is used for searching more deterministic results something like
WHERE type={}
Where as *q* is something like WHERE type like '%%'
user *fq*, if your are sure of what your going to search
use *q*, if not sure what your trying to search
If you are using fq and if you do not get any matchin
The results will be scored, but only based on terms in q, not terms in fq.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: johnmu...@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 6:41 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Using fq as OR
Interesting!! I did not know that using &qu
ng out with this topic. I am learning a lot
-- MJ
-Original Message-
From: Jack Krupansky
To: solr-user
Sent: Wed, May 21, 2014 6:07 pm
Subject: Re: Using fq as OR
As I indicated in my original response, the fq query terms do not
participate in any way in the scoring of documents -
, or add a boosting query
using the bq parameter. The latter approach works for the dismax and edismax
query parsers only.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: johnmu...@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 5:51 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Using fq as OR
Hi
t;
> In other words, what exactly were you trying to achieve by using fq?
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> -Original Message- From: johnmu...@aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 12:19 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Using fq as OR
>
>
&g
will not give me the same ranking, than why?
-- MJ
-Original Message-
From: Jack Krupansky
To: solr-user
Sent: Wed, May 21, 2014 5:06 pm
Subject: Re: Using fq as OR
The whole point of a filter query is to hide data but without impacting the
scoring for the non-hidden data. A secon
filtering terms to participate in the
document scoring.
In other words, what exactly were you trying to achieve by using fq?
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: johnmu...@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2014 12:19 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Using fq as OR
ent path, giving me different rank result, is not good.
-- MJ
-Original Message-----
From: Shawn Heisey
To: solr-user
Sent: Wed, May 21, 2014 11:42 am
Subject: Re: Using fq as OR
On 5/21/2014 9:26 AM, johnmu...@aol.com wrote:
> Currently, I'm building my search as fo
How would you characterizer the differences that you see which you try
"q=search string ...&fq=type:(type_a OR type_b OR type_c OR ...)"? That does
look like the right way to do it. Is the count of documents different? Are
some documents missing or added? Or is it just the ordering of documents
On 5/21/2014 9:26 AM, johnmu...@aol.com wrote:
> Currently, I'm building my search as follows:
>
>
> q=(search string ...) AND (type:type_a OR type:type_b OR type:type_c OR
> ...)
>
>
> Which means anything I search for will be AND'ed to be in either fields that
> have "type_a", "type_b", "ty
14 matches
Mail list logo
