Re: wildcards match end-of-word?

Remove the stopword and stemmer filters from your schema and reindex. Removing stopwords means you can never match “vitamin a”. Stemming interferes with wildcard matches. Either stem or do wildcards on a field, not both. Also, what do your users expect to get with wildcard matches? Those are a

RE: [External] Re: wildcards match end-of-word?

@lucene.apache.org Subject: RE: [External] Re: wildcards match end-of-word? Folks, I am seeing very strange (bad) wildcard behavior (solr 8). "kinase" finds hits as expected. "kin*ase" and "kin*se" find 0 results. "kinase*" matches only values like &qu

Re: [External] Re: wildcards match end-of-word?

e results above > - various analyses trying to understand why > - the schema for the fieldType in question > > > https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/10fIAesqkTnvmJBFaerEhnqWhSiaEvVW7u9jE1nX564Q/edit?usp=sharing > > thanks, > steve > > -----Original Message- > Fr

RE: [External] Re: wildcards match end-of-word?

chema for the fieldType in question https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/10fIAesqkTnvmJBFaerEhnqWhSiaEvVW7u9jE1nX564Q/edit?usp=sharing thanks, steve -Original Message- From: Sotiris Fragkiskos Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 4:03 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: [Exte

Re: wildcards match end-of-word?

Hi Erick, thanks very much for this information, it was immensely useful, I always had the same question! I'm now seeing the Analysis page and finally I don't have to rely on an external online stemmer to see what solr *probably* stemmed the term to!! But I still can't make the asterisk and questio

Re: wildcards match end-of-word?

Steve: You _really_ want to get acquainted with the admin UI/Analysis page ;). Choose a core/collection and you should see the choice. It shows you exactly what transformations your data goes through. If you hover over the light gray pairs of letters, you’ll get a tooltip showing you what part

RE: [External] Re: wildcards match end-of-word?

"query":{ "time":0.0}, "facet":{ "time":0.0}, "facet_module":{ "time":0.0}, "mlt":{ "time":0.0}, "highlight":{ "time":

Re: wildcards match end-of-word?

“kinase*” does match “kinase”. On the page you linked to, it defines “*” as matching "Multiple characters (matches zero or more sequential characters)”. If it is not matching, you may be using a stemmer on that field or doing some other processing that changes the tokens. wunder Walter Underwoo

Re: Wildcards and Phrase queries

ention yet.  Ahmet From: Isaac Hebsh To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 12:25 AM Subject: Re: Wildcards and Phrase queries Ahmet, it looks great! Can you tell us why havn't this code been commited into lucene+solr trunk? On Su

Re: Wildcards and Phrase queries

r@lucene.apache.org > Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2013 9:33 PM > Subject: Re: Wildcards and Phrase queries > > > Thanks Erick. > Maybe lucene (java-user) is a better mailing list to ask in? > > > On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Erick Erickson >wrote: > > > Wou

Re: Wildcards and Phrase queries

From: Isaac Hebsh To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2013 9:33 PM Subject: Re: Wildcards and Phrase queries Thanks Erick. Maybe lucene (java-user) is a better mailing list to ask in? On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Erick Erickson wrote

Re: Wildcards and Phrase queries

Thanks Erick. Maybe lucene (java-user) is a better mailing list to ask in? On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Erick Erickson wrote: > Wouldn't imagine they're production ready, they haven't been touched > in months. > > So I'd say you're on your own here in terms of whether you wanted > to use the

Re: Wildcards and Phrase queries

Wouldn't imagine they're production ready, they haven't been touched in months. So I'd say you're on your own here in terms of whether you wanted to use these for production. I confess I don't know what state they were left in or why they were never committed. FWIW, Erick On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 a

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

Thank you! I actually tried to look through Jira, but I didn't focus on the minor issues. For me, this is quite critical.. :-) Any chance of merging this into the 4.0.1 release? Regards, Haagen Den 11. des. 2012 kl. 12:45 skrev Ahmet Arslan: >> Lowercasing actually seems to work with Wildc

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

> Lowercasing actually seems to work with Wildcard queries, > but not with fuzzy queries.  Are there any reasons why > I should experience such a difference? Hi Haagen, Yonik added this recently. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-4076

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

Lowercasing actually seems to work with Wildcard queries, but not with fuzzy queries. Are there any reasons why I should experience such a difference? Regards, Haagen Den 10. des. 2012 kl. 13:24 skrev Haagen Hasle: > > It's been two months since I asked about wildcards and phonetic filters

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

It's been two months since I asked about wildcards and phonetic filters, and finally the task of upgrading Solr to version 4.0 was prioritized in our project. So the last couple of days I've been working on it. Another team member upgraded Solr from 3.4 to 4.0, and I've been making changes to

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

It won't crash Solr if you include it, but it probably won't do what you expect either due to how wildcards are expanded. And it gets worse. DoubleMetaphone tries to reduce what it analyzes, well, phonetically with "close" letters (or multiple choices). Some phonetic filters change to fixed 4 lett

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

Hi, Also be sure to check out the new BeiderMorse phonetic: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/AnalyzersTokenizersTokenFilters#solr.BeiderMorseFilterFactory which handles middle eastern and eastern european names very well. Phonetic algorithms use tons of rules for how to transform an input depending

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

I used the admin/analysis page (great tip, I had never used it before - thank you!) and it seems to me that the DoubleMetaphone filter converts "Hågen" to both "JN" and "KN". Will that crash the Solr analysis if I try to include this filter in the multiterm-analysis? Do you know where I can f

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

To answer your first question, yes, you've got it right. If you define a multiterm section in your fieldType, whatever you put in that section gets applied whether the underlying class is MultiTermAware or not. Which means you can shoot yourself in the foot really bad ... Well, you have 6 or so po

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

I understand that I'm quickly reaching the boundaries of my Solr-competence when I'm supposed to read about "Expert Level" concepts.. :) I had already read it once, but now I read it again. Twice. And I'm not sure if I understand it correctly.. So let me ask a follow-up question: If I define

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

I guess synonyms would give me a similar result as using regexes, like Jack wrote about. I've thought about that, but I don't think it would be good enough. Substituting "k" for "ch" is easy enough, but the problem is that I have to think of every possible substitution in advance. I'd like

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

Hi, Consider looking into synonyms and ngrams. Otis -- Performance Monitoring - http://sematext.com/spm On Oct 8, 2012 11:21 AM, "Hågen Pihlstrøm Hasle" wrote: > Hi! > > I'm quite new to Solr, I was recently asked to help out on a project where > the previous "Solr-person" quit quite suddenly.

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

whether phonetic filters can be multiterm aware: I'd be leery of this, as I basically don't quite know how that would behave. You'd have to insure that the algorithms changed the first parts of the words uniformly, regardless of what followed. I'm pretty sure that _some_ phonetic algorithms do no

Re: Wildcards and fuzzy/phonetic query

A regular expression term may provide what you want, but not exactly. Maybe something like: /(ch|k)r.*/ (No guarantee that will actually work.) See: http://lucene.apache.org/core/4_0_0-BETA/queryparser/org/apache/lucene/queryparser/classic/package-summary.html#Regexp_Searches And probably slo

Re: wildcards and German umlauts

Hi, Agree that this is annoying for foreign languages. I get the idea behind the original behaviour, but there could be more elegant ways of handling it. It would make sense to always run the CharFilters. Perhaps a mechanism where TokenFilters can be tagged for exclusion from wildcard terms wou

Re: wildcards and German umlauts

Ah, NOW I got it. It's not a bug, it's a feature. But that would mean, that every character-manipulation (e.g. char-mapping/replacement, Porter-Stemmer in some cases ...) would cause a wildcard-query to fail. That too bad. But why? What's the Problem with passing the prefix through the analyzer/

Re: wildcards and German umlauts

I don't get you. Did I wrote something of an Analyzer? Actually not. -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/wildcards-and-German-umlauts-tp499972p2999074.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: wildcards and German umlauts

Wildcard queries are not passed through an analyzer. > Ah, BTW, > > since the problem seems to be a query-parser-issue a simple workarround > could be done by simple replace all Umlauts with ASCII-Characters (ä = ae, > ö = oe, ü = ue for example) before sending the query to Solr and use a > solr.

Re: wildcards and German umlauts

Ah, BTW, since the problem seems to be a query-parser-issue a simple workarround could be done by simple replace all Umlauts with ASCII-Characters (ä = ae, ö = oe, ü = ue for example) before sending the query to Solr and use a solr.MappingCharFilterFactory with the same replacements (ä = ae, ö = o

Re: wildcards and German umlauts

Hi, "if i type complete word (such as "übersicht"). But there are no hits, if i use wildcards (such as "über*") Searching with wildcards and without umlauts works as well." I can confirm that. Greetz, Sebastian -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/wildcards-an

Re: wildcards in solr synonyms file

: So for example, i have a document : cars - 10% off : and I search for word "discount", this document should be returned aswell. : : In synonyms file, I have written : discount => *% I would implement something like this by having something at index time like the PatternReplaceTokenFilter at i

Re: wildcards in solr synonyms file

Does the synonyms file support regular expressions? -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/wildcards-in-solr-synonyms-file-tp1053691p1055822.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: wildcards in solr synonyms file

Riz, The synonyms file doesn't support wildcards. You'll need to list all numbers explicitly. Otis Sematext :: http://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/ - Original Message > From: M.Rizwan > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.o

Re: Wildcards queries

You need to look carefully at your schema.xml. There are plenty of comments in that file describing what's going on. That's where you set up your analyzers by chaining together various tokenizers and filters. I think you're confused about indexing and storing. Generally it's a bad practice to allo

Re: Wildcards queries

Still not enough info. Please show: 1> the field type (not field, but field type showing the analyzers for the field you're interested in). 2> example data you've indexed 3> the query you submit 4> the response from the query (especially with &debugQuery=on appended to the query). Otherwise, it's

Re: Wildcards queries

Hi, a bit more information would help to identify what's the problem in your case. but in general these facts come into my mind: - leading wildcard queries are not available in solr (without extending the QueryParser). - no text analysing will be performed on the search word when using wildcards

Re: Wildcards queries

Hi, thanks for the reply. I am an absolute beginner with Solr. I have taken, for the beginning, the configuration from {solr.home}example/solr . In solrconfig.xml are all queryparser commented out ;-( Where can a find the QeryParser? Javadoc, Wiki? Regards, Robert 2010/7/6 Mark Miller : > On

Re: Wildcards queries

On 7/6/10 8:53 AM, Robert Naczinski wrote: > Hi, > > we use in our application EmbeddedSolrServer. Great! > Everything went fine. Excellent! > Now I want use wildcards queries. Cool! > > It does not work. Bummer! > Must be adapted for the schema.xml? Not necessarily... > > Can someon

autosuggest via solr.EdgeNGramFilterFactory (was: Re: wildcards in stopword list)

Hi Ahmet, Well after some more testing I am now convinced that you rock :) I like the solution because its obviously way less hacky and more importantly I expect this to be a lot faster and less memory intensive, since instead of a facet prefix or terms search, I am doing an "equality" compariso

Re: wildcards in stopword list

On 03.02.2010, at 14:34, Ahmet Arslan wrote: > >> Actually I plan to write a bigger blog post about the >> approach. In order to match the different fields I actually >> have a separate core with an index dedicated to auto suggest >> alone where I merge all fields together via some javascript >>

Re: wildcards in stopword list

On 03.02.2010, at 15:19, Ahmet Arslan wrote: >>> With this field type, the query "ding" or "din" or >> "di" would return "Foo Bar Ding Dong". >> >> hmm wouldnt it return "foo bar ding dong" ? > > No, it will return original string. In this method you are not using faceting > anymore. You are

Re: wildcards in stopword list

> > With this field type, the query "ding" or "din" or > "di" would return "Foo Bar Ding Dong". > > hmm wouldnt it return "foo bar ding dong" ? No, it will return original string. In this method you are not using faceting anymore. You are just querying and requesting a field.

Re: wildcards in stopword list

On 03.02.2010, at 14:34, Ahmet Arslan wrote: > >> Actually I plan to write a bigger blog post about the >> approach. In order to match the different fields I actually >> have a separate core with an index dedicated to auto suggest >> alone where I merge all fields together via some javascript >>

Re: wildcards in stopword list

> Actually I plan to write a bigger blog post about the > approach. In order to match the different fields I actually > have a separate core with an index dedicated to auto suggest > alone where I merge all fields together via some javascript > code: > > This way I can then use terms for a single

Re: wildcards in stopword list

On 03.02.2010, at 13:54, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote: > The issue is that I have multiple fields of data (names, address etc) that > should all be relevant for the auto suggest. Furthermore a "phrase" entered > can either match on one field or any combination of fields. Phrase in this > context me

Re: wildcards in stopword list

On 03.02.2010, at 13:41, Ahmet Arslan wrote: >> this way i can do a prefix facet search for the term "foo" >> or "bar" and in both cases i can show the user "Foo Bar" >> with a bit of frontend logic to split off the "payload" aka >> original data. > > So you have a list of phrases (pre-extracted

Re: wildcards in stopword list

> this way i can do a prefix facet search for the term "foo" > or "bar" and in both cases i can show the user "Foo Bar" > with a bit of frontend logic to split off the "payload" aka > original data. So you have a list of phrases (pre-extracted) to be used for auto-suggest? Or you are using bi-gra

Re: wildcards in stopword list

On 03.02.2010, at 13:07, Ahmet Arslan wrote: >> i am doing some funky hackery inside DIH via javascript to >> make my autosuggest work. i basically split phrases and >> store them together with the full phrase: >> >> the phrase: >> "Foo Bar" >> >> becomes: >> >> Foo Bar >> foo bar >> {foo}Foo_

Re: wildcards in stopword list

> I am wondering if there is some way to maintain a stopword > list with widcards: > > ignoring anything that starts with "foo": > foo* A custom TokenFilterFactory derived from StopFilterFactory can remove a token if it matches a java.util.regex.Pattern. List of patterns can be loaded from a fi

Re: Wildcards at the Beginning of a Search.

There is a "text_rev" field type in the example schema.xml file in the official release of 1.4. It uses the ReversedWildcardFilterFactory to revers a field. You can do a copyField from the field you want to use for leading wildcard searches to a field using the text_rev field, and then do a regular

Re: Wildcards at the Beginning of a Search.

is in solr 1.4 maby a way to search with an wildcard at the beginning? in 1.3 i cant activate it. KingArtus

RE: Wildcards at the Beginning of a Search.

July 20, 2009 10:00 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Wildcards at the Beginning of a Search. There is a hacky way to do it if you can pull it off. You can prepend some known prefix to the field then strip it off when you get the results back. An example would be putting Phone: in

Re: Wildcards at the Beginning of a Search.

nto a file sort so you will see a performance dip. -- Jeff Newburn Software Engineer, Zappos.com jnewb...@zappos.com - 702-943-7562 From: Erik Hatcher Reply-To: Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 08:20:15 -0400 To: Subject: Re: Wildcards at the Beginning of a Search. See http://issues.apache.org/jira/b

Re: Wildcards at the Beginning of a Search.

To: > Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 08:20:15 -0400 > To: > Subject: Re: Wildcards at the Beginning of a Search. > > See http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-218 - Solr currently > does not have leading wildcard support enabled. > > Erik > > On Jul 20, 2009, at 8:09 AM,

Re: Wildcards at the Beginning of a Search.

See http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-218 - Solr currently does not have leading wildcard support enabled. Erik On Jul 20, 2009, at 8:09 AM, Jörg Agatz wrote: Hallo Solr Users... I tryed to search with a Wildcard at the beginning from a search. for example, i will search fo

Re: wildcards and German umlauts

Hi, I've got the same problem: searching using wildcards and umlaut -> no results. Just as you descriped it: "if i type complete word (such as "übersicht"). But there are no hits, if i use wildcards (such as "über*") Searching with wildcards and without umlauts works as well." Anyone found the

Re: Wildcards

Thanks a lot! I checked it, when I search for "g?rden" it works, only "g?rdener" does not... I will try the copyField solution. On Jan 21, 2008 11:23 PM, Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 21, 2008 5:18 PM, dojolava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I just started to use solr and I e

Re: Wildcards

On Jan 21, 2008 5:18 PM, dojolava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just started to use solr and I experience strange behaviour when it comes > to wildcards. > > When I use the StandardRequestHandler queries like "eur?p?an" or "eur*an" > work fine. > But "garden?r" or "admini*tion" do not bring any re

Re: Wildcards in first search word including a upper case character

wildcard queries are not first passed through an analyzer. See http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ#head-4d62118417eaef0dcb87f4370583f809848ea695 "Are Wildcard Queries Case Sensitive", which also has an explanation of *why* wildcards aren't passed through an analyzer. So, assuming you

Re: wildcards and German umlauts

On Dienstag, 15. Januar 2008, Alexey Shakov wrote: > Index-searching works, if i type complete word (such as "übersicht"). > But there are no hits, if i use wildcards (such as "über*") > Searching with wildcards and without umlauts works as well. Maybe this describes your problem on the Lucene le

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

Chris Hostetter a écrit : : It could be a useful request handler ? Giving a field, with a perhaps, but as i said -- i think it requires more then just a special request handler, you want a special index as well. FYI: there is an ongoing thread on this general topic on the java-user list, i didn

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

: It could be a useful request handler ? Giving a field, with a perhaps, but as i said -- i think it requires more then just a special request handler, you want a special index as well. FYI: there is an ongoing thread on this general topic on the java-user list, i didn't have the time/energy to

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

Hi Chris, The skills on this list are really very stimulating. I'm sad but I will probably not be able to contribute. Solr may not be the choosen technology of the project I'm working on, because of server administration issues (java). I know that there is no performances arguments (lucene is

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

: Do you mean something like below ? : w wo wor word yeah, but there are some Tokenizers that make this trivial (EdgeNGramTokenizer i think is the name) : project, definitively not a good practice for portability of indexes. A : duplicate field with an analyser to produce a sortable ASCII versi

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

Sorry to jump on a "Side note" of the thread, but the topic is about some of my need of the moment. Side Note: It's my opinion that "type ahead" or "auto complete' style functionality is best addressed by customized logic (most likely using specially built fields containing all of the pref

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

Hi, Hoss. I have a number of things I'd like to post... but the generally-useful stuff is unfortunately a bit interwoven with the special-case stuff, and I need to get out of breathing-down-my-back deadline mode to find the time to separate them, clean up and comment, make test cases, etc. Hop

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

Side Note: It's my opinion that "type ahead" or "auto complete' style functionality is best addressed by customized logic (most likely using specially built fields containing all of the prefixes of the key words up to N characters as seperate tokens). simple uses of PrefixQueries are only going o

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

: I have a local version of DisMax which parameterizes the escaping so : certain operators can be allowed through, which I'd be happy to : contribute to you or the codebase, but I expect SimpleRH may be a better That sounds like it would be a really usefull patch if you be interested in posting i

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

Ok further to my email below i've been testing with q=radioh?* Basically the problem is, searching artists even with Radiohead having a big boost, it's returning stuff with less boost before like "Radiohead+Ani Di Franco" or "Radiohead+Michael Stipe" The debug output is below, but basically,

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

Yeah i thought of that solution but this is a 20G index with each document having around 300 or those numbers so i was a bit worried about the performance.. I'll try anyway, thanks! On 06/06/07, *Yonik Seeley* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: On 6/6/07, galo <[EMAIL PR

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

At 4:40 PM +0100 6/6/07, galo wrote: >1. I want to use solr for some sort of live search, querying with incomplete >terms + wildcard and getting any similar results. Radioh* would return >anything containing that string. The DisMax req. hander doesn't accept >wildcards in the q param so i'm tryi

Re: Wildcards / Binary searches

On 6/6/07, galo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 3. I'm trying to implement another index where I store a number of int values for each document. Everything works ok as integers but i'd like to have some sort of fuzzy searches based on the bit representation of the numbers. Essentially, this number: 1

RE: Wildcards / Binary searches

I have a similar question about dismax, here is what Chris said: the dismax handler uses a much more simplified query syntax then the standard request handler. Only +, -, and " are special characters so wildcards are not supported. HTH -Original Message- From: galo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTE

Re: Wildcards

On 3/21/07, Michael Kimsal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well, I recompiled SOLR against the latest lucene release (2.1.0) and it still doesn't work. The nabble reference page there indicates that it might not have worked right in 2.1.0 but someone there is suggesting that it works in the latest tr

Re: Wildcards

Well, I recompiled SOLR against the latest lucene release (2.1.0) and it still doesn't work. The nabble reference page there indicates that it might not have worked right in 2.1.0 but someone there is suggesting that it works in the latest trunk. Is there perhaps something else that would need t

Re: Wildcards

This looks like a lucene issue. http://www.nabble.com/-jira--Created%3A-%28LUCENE-839%29-WildcardQuery-do-not-find-documents-if-leading-and-trailing-*-is-used-tf3435336.html And it appears to have been fixed recently: "This problem was already fixed since 2.1.0. " When was 2.1.0 out? Oh - las

Re: Wildcards

I changed the 'leading wildcard' setting in the query parser (well, actually someone else here did, but it works). *789 works but *456* still doesn't work. Yeah, I guess I'm seeing the same behaviour as you are. Does this seem like a potential bug? Like the first * is cancelling out the logi

Re: Wildcards

Lucene now supports *456* type queries, however it requires setting an attribute to allow leading wildcards on the QueryParser. Solr does not set this flag (that I can tell in my quick search) so I don't believe you can do this with Solr currently, until/unless an option is made to set tha