Thanks for the heads up.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Erick Erickson
wrote:
> John:
>
> Glad it worked. Bit a little careful with large slops. As the slop
> increases, you approach the same result set as
>
> vis AND dis AND dur
>
> so choosing the appropriate slop is something of a balancing
John:
Glad it worked. Bit a little careful with large slops. As the slop
increases, you approach the same result set as
vis AND dis AND dur
so choosing the appropriate slop is something of a balancing act
Best,
Erick
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 2:10 AM, John Nielsen wrote:
> I didn't know about s
I didn't know about sloppy queries. This is great stuff!
I solved it with a &qs=100.
Thank you for the help.
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Erick Erickson
wrote:
> just skimmed, but:
>
> bq: I would get a hit for "vis dis dur", but "vis dur dis" no longer
> returns anything. This is not
just skimmed, but:
bq: I would get a hit for "vis dis dur", but "vis dur dis" no longer
returns anything. This is not an option for me
Would slop help here? i.e. "vis dur dis"~3 or some such?
Best
Erick
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 4:34 AM, John Nielsen wrote:
> q and logical operators.
>
> Hi all
