- From: Michael Sokolov
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 8:43 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: different fields for user-supplied phrases in edismax
I want terms to be stemmed, unless they are quoted, using dismax.
On 12/12/14 8:19 PM, Amit Jha wrote:
Hi Mike,
What is exact your us
boost as do less-precise phrases.
But it does need to be optional since it has an added cost at query time.
-- Jack Krupansky
-Original Message-
From: Michael Sokolov
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 8:43 AM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: different fields for user-supplied
I want terms to be stemmed, unless they are quoted, using dismax.
On 12/12/14 8:19 PM, Amit Jha wrote:
Hi Mike,
What is exact your use case?
What do mean by "controlling the fields used for phrase queries" ?
Rgds
AJ
On 12-Dec-2014, at 20:11, Michael Sokolov
wrote:
Doug - I believe pf co
Hi Mike,
What is exact your use case?
What do mean by "controlling the fields used for phrase queries" ?
Rgds
AJ
> On 12-Dec-2014, at 20:11, Michael Sokolov
> wrote:
>
> Doug - I believe pf controls the fields that are used for the phrase queries
> *generated by the parser*.
>
> What I
Doug - I believe pf controls the fields that are used for the phrase
queries *generated by the parser*.
What I am after is controlling the fields used for the phrase queries
*supplied by the user* -- ie surrounded by double-quotes.
-Mike
On 12/12/2014 08:53 AM, Doug Turnbull wrote:
Michael,
Michael,
I typically solve this problem by using a copyField and running different
analysis on the destination field. Then you could use this field as pf
insteaf of qf. If I recall, fields in pf must also be mentioned in qf for
this to work.
-Doug
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Michael Sokolov
Yes, I guess it's a common expectation that searches work this way. It
was actually almost trivial to add as an extension to the edismax
parser, and I have what I need now; I opened SOLR-6842; if there's
interest I'll try to find the time to contribute back to Solr
-Mike
On 12/11/14 5:20 PM,
t;9e50c5b1-49cc-444a-a752-8b8ebe04b6f6",
"company":"Apple ",
"full_name":"user4 user4",
"first_name":"user4"}]
}},
{
"groupValue":"z3ra",
"doclist":{"numFound":1,"start":0,"docs":[
{
"job_tree":"",
"last_name":"z3ra",
"state":"",
"country":"",
"city":"",
"id":"2a82735d-cce0-400e-826b-b78f6bb56115",
"company":"",
"full_name":"usAlaa z3ra",
"first_name":"usAlaa"}]
}}]}}}
you can go to the multi lengaul issue in same place where you put your issue
and look for schema configuration.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/different-fields-for-user-supplied-phrases-in-edismax-tp4173862p4173886.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi Mike,
If I am not wrong, you are trying to simulate google behaviour.
If you use quotes, google return exact matches. I think that makes perfectly
sense and will be a valuable addition. I remember some folks asked/requested
this behaviour in the list.
Ahmet
On Thursday, December 11, 2014
I'd like to supply a different set of fields for phrases than for bare
terms. Specifically, we'd like to treat phrases as more "exact" -
probably turning off stemming and generally having a tighter analysis
chain. Note: this is *not* what's done by configuring "pf" which
controls fields for t
10 matches
Mail list logo
