Don't use N-grams at query time.
-Original message-
> From:prem1980
> Sent: Monday 4th August 2014 17:47
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Solr substring search yields all indexed results
>
> To do a substring search, I have added a new
. Even
when search changes to "App". All the above items are pulled. How can I fix
this issue?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Solr-substring-search-yields-all-indexed-results-tp4151012.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Yah, you're getting away with it due to the small data size. As
your data grows, the underlying mechanisms have to enumerate
every term in the field in order to find terms that match so it
can get _very_ expensive with large data sets.
Best to bite the bullet early or, better yet, see if you reall
Hi:
I would start looking:
http://docs.lucidworks.com/display/solr/The+Standard+Query+Parser
And the
org.apache.lucene.queryparser.flexible.standard.StandardQueryParser.java
Hope it helps.
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Scott Schneider <
scott_schnei...@symantec.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm
Hello,
I'm trying to find out how Solr runs a query for "*foo*". Google tells me that
you need to use NGramFilterFactory for that kind of substring search, but I
find that even with very simple fieldTypes, it just works. (Perhaps because
I'm testing on very small data sets, Solr is willing to
