; protected="protwords_nostem.txt"/>
>
>
>
>
>
> pattern="(?i)\b(anti|hypo|hyper|non)[-\\/ ](\w+)\b" replacement="$1$2"/>
>
> generateWordParts="1" generateNumberParts="1" catenateWords="0"
> cate
is as from Solr. Slop has been tinkered with to identify
PF/PF2/PF3 clauses where PF fields have a slop ending in 0, pf2 ending in
1, pf3 ending in 2 eg ~10, ~11, ~12, etc.
=
Example 1: "aspirin dose in rats"
==
With query-time synonyms:
===
///
Emir
Sow=false .. thanks for this!
The problem seems to be due to a stopword. Everything is fine when I avoid
stopwords in my query. The stopword might get removed in the query matching,
but I would need to allow some slop perhaps for pf2.
Thanks
Rick
On January 26, 2018 8:14:06 AM EST
http://sematext.com/
> On 26 Jan 2018, at 13:38, Rick Leir wrote:
>
> Emir
> Thanks, I will do when I get off this bus.
>
> I have run the text thru the SolrAdmin Analyzer, it looks fine.
>
> According to the debugQuery output, individual words match in the qf, but not
Emir
Thanks, I will do when I get off this bus.
I have run the text thru the SolrAdmin Analyzer, it looks fine.
According to the debugQuery output, individual words match in the qf, but not
the pair that pf2 should match.
I compare the configs for English and French, and they are the same
Hi Rick,
Can you include sample of your query and text that should match.
Thanks,
Emir
--
Monitoring - Log Management - Alerting - Anomaly Detection
Solr & Elasticsearch Consulting Support Training - http://sematext.com/
> On 25 Jan 2018, at 23:13, Rick Leir wrote:
>
>
>
&
Hi all
My pf2 keywords^11.0 works for english not for french. Here are the fieldtypes,
actually from two schema.xml's in separate cores. Solr 5.2.2, edismax, q.op AND
I suspect there are several problems with the french schema. Maybe I only
needed to show the query analyzer, not the
gt;
> On Jul 31, 2017 5:47 PM, "Niraj Aswani" wrote:
>
> > Hi Aman,
> >
> > Thank you very much your reply.
> >
> > Let me elaborate my question a bit more using your example in this case.
> >
> > AFAIK, what the pf2 parameter is doing to
te my question a bit more using your example in this case.
>
> AFAIK, what the pf2 parameter is doing to the query is adding the following
> phrase queries:
>
> (_text_:"system memory") (_text_:"memory oem") (_text_:"oem retail")
>
> There are three
Hi Aman,
Thank you very much your reply.
Let me elaborate my question a bit more using your example in this case.
AFAIK, what the pf2 parameter is doing to the query is adding the following
phrase queries:
(_text_:"system memory") (_text_:"memory oem") (_text_:"oem
Hi Niraj,
Should I expect it to check the following bigram phrases?
Yes it will check.
ex- documents & query is given below
http://localhost:8983/solr/myfile/select?wt=xml&fl=name&indent=on&q=*System
AND Memory AND (OEM OR Retail)*&rows=50&wt=json&*qf=_text_&
Hi,
I am using solr 4.4 and bit confused about how does the edismax parser
treat the pf2 parameter when both the AND and OR operators are used in the
query with ps2=0
For example:
pf2=title^100
q=HDMI AND Video AND (Wire OR Cable)
Should I expect it to check the following bigram phrases?
hdmi
avenue, it is not
considered anymore in pf2.
I am looking for a work around, or another way to give lower score to
frequent words in solr.
If anyone could help it would be great.
Elisabeth
d
> effectively eliminate the coord. , though at a lower score (1 / position
> difference IIRC)
> - Have you tried sending "disableCoord" to Solr? I usually leave coord on,
> as I consider it useful to bias towards more matches. But that option
> exists.
> - Using pf2 and
to bias towards more matches. But that option
exists.
- Using pf2 and pf3 together means that 3 word phrase matches will get
counted twice. Once as a three word phrase match. Again as multiple 2 word
phrase matches. I usually just stick with pf2.
Best!
-Doug
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:32 AM elisabet
Hello all,
I am using Solr 4.10.1. I use edismax, with pf2 to boost documents starting
with. I use a start with token (b) automatically added at index time,
and added in request at query time.
I have a problem at this point.
request is *q=b saint denis rer*
the start with field is
; > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think the query is important in this case.
> > > > >
> > > > > After checking out solr's debug output, I dont think the query norm
> > is
> > > >
wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I don't think the query is important in this case.
> > > >
> > > > After checking out solr's debug output, I dont think the query norm
> is
> > > > relevant either
> After checking out solr's debug output, I dont think the query norm is
> > > relevant either.
> > >
> > > I think the scoring changes because
> > >
> > > 1) in first case, I have same slop for catchall and name fields. Bot
> > match
> > &
ug output, I dont think the query norm is
> > relevant either.
> >
> > I think the scoring changes because
> >
> > 1) in first case, I have same slop for catchall and name fields. Bot
> match
> > pf2 pf3. In this case, solr uses max of both for scoring pf2 pf3 resu
; After checking out solr's debug output, I dont think the query norm is
> relevant either.
>
> I think the scoring changes because
>
> 1) in first case, I have same slop for catchall and name fields. Bot match
> pf2 pf3. In this case, solr uses max of both for scoring pf2
Hello,
I don't think the query is important in this case.
After checking out solr's debug output, I dont think the query norm is
relevant either.
I think the scoring changes because
1) in first case, I have same slop for catchall and name fields. Bot match
pf2 pf3. In this case, sol
What is your query?
On Mon, 21 Dec 2015, 14:37 elisabeth benoit
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I am using solr 4.10.1 and I have configured my pf2 pf3 like this
>
> catchall~0^0.2 name~0^0.21 synonyms^0.2
> catchall~0^0.2 name~0^0.21 synonyms^0.2
>
> my search field (qf) is m
Hello all,
I am using solr 4.10.1 and I have configured my pf2 pf3 like this
catchall~0^0.2 name~0^0.21 synonyms^0.2
catchall~0^0.2 name~0^0.21 synonyms^0.2
my search field (qf) is my catchall field
I'v been trying to change slop in pf2, pf3 for catchall and synonyms (going
from 0, or de
o not be matched. If you want to get
> around
> > > > this,
> > > > > > try setting your slop = 1 in which case it should match Gare
> Saint
> > > > Lazare
> > > > > > even with the de in it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On M
; > > > try setting your slop = 1 in which case it should match Gare Saint
> > > Lazare
> > > > > even with the de in it.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:22 PM elisabeth benoit <
> > > > > elisaelisael...@gmail.co
gt; > > > even with the de in it.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:22 PM elisabeth benoit <
> > > > elisaelisael...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hello,
> > > >>
> > > >> I am usin
; Lazare
> > > even with the de in it.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:22 PM elisabeth benoit <
> > > elisaelisael...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> I am using solr 4.10.1. I have
t; > try setting your slop = 1 in which case it should match Gare Saint Lazare
> > even with the de in it.
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:22 PM elisabeth benoit <
> > elisaelisael...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I
have a field with stopwords
>>
>>
>> > words="stopwords.txt"
>> enablePositionIncrements="true"/>
>>
>> And I use pf2 pf3 on that field with a slop of 0.
>>
>> If the request is "Gare Saint Lazare", and I have a docume
round this,
try setting your slop = 1 in which case it should match Gare Saint Lazare
even with the de in it.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:22 PM elisabeth benoit
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am using solr 4.10.1. I have a field with stopwords
>
>
> enablePositionIncrements="true"
Hello,
I am using solr 4.10.1. I have a field with stopwords
And I use pf2 pf3 on that field with a slop of 0.
If the request is "Gare Saint Lazare", and I have a document "Gare de Saint
Lazare", "de" being a stopword, this document doesn't get the
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2058
On 2010-08-19 Ron Mayer wrote:
> Chris Hostetter wrote:
>> [Yonik Seeley wrote]
>> : Perhaps fold it into the pf/pf2 syntax?
>> : pf=text~1^2 // proposed syntax...
>>
>> Big +1 to this idea ...
> ...
> I added a ticket
Chris Hostetter wrote:
> : Perhaps fold it into the pf/pf2 syntax?
> :
> : pf=text^2// current syntax... makes phrases with a boost of 2
> : pf=text~1^2 // proposed syntax... makes phrases with a slop of 1 and
> : a boost of 2
> :
> : That actually seems pretty nat
: Perhaps fold it into the pf/pf2 syntax?
:
: pf=text^2// current syntax... makes phrases with a boost of 2
: pf=text~1^2 // proposed syntax... makes phrases with a slop of 1 and
: a boost of 2
:
: That actually seems pretty natural given the lucene query syntax - an
: actual boosted
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Ron Mayer wrote:
> Yonik Seeley wrote:
>> Perhaps a ps2 parameter to match pf2?
>
> That might be nice.
>
> I could try to put together such a patch if people were interested.
>
> One more thing I've been contemplating is if my res
Yonik Seeley wrote:
> Perhaps a ps2 parameter to match pf2?
That might be nice.
I could try to put together such a patch if people were interested.
One more thing I've been contemplating is if my results might
be even better if I had a couple different "pf2"s with different
Perhaps a ps2 parameter to match pf2?
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Ron Mayer wrote:
> Jayendra Patil wrote:
>> We pretty much had the same issue, ended up customizing the ExtendedDismax
>> code.
>>
>> In your case its jus
PM, Ron Mayer wrote:
>> Short summary:
>>
>> Is there any way I can specify that I want a lot
>> of phrase slop for the "pf" parameter, but none
>> at all for the "pf2" parameter?
>>
>> I find the 'pf' parameter wit
,
tiebreaker, 0);
Regards,
Jayendra
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Ron Mayer wrote:
> Short summary:
>
> Is there any way I can specify that I want a lot
> of phrase slop for the "pf" parameter, but none
> at all for the "pf2" parameter?
>
>
Short summary:
Is there any way I can specify that I want a lot
of phrase slop for the "pf" parameter, but none
at all for the "pf2" parameter?
I find the 'pf' parameter with a pretty large 'ps' to do a very
nice job for providing a modest boo
41 matches
Mail list logo
