>>>>> "debug": {
>>>>> "rawquerystring": "Food",
>>>>> "querystring": "Food",
>>>>> "parsedquery": "(+DisjunctionMaxQuery((label:Food^3.0)) ())/no_coord",
>>>>> "parsedquery_toString": "+(label:Food^3.0) ()",
>>>>> "explain": {},
>>>>> "QParser": "DisMaxQParser",
>>>>> "altquerystring": null,
>>>>> "boostfuncs": null,
>>>>> ...
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't understand how/why this doesn't use a "contains" operator.
>>>>> This was the behavior on the old 1.4 instance. I went through the
>>>>> changelog for 1.4 to 5.1, but I don't find any explicit information
>>>>> about dismax behaving differently, except the "mm" parameter needs a
>>>>> default. I tried many values for mm (including 0, 100%, 100, etc) but
>>>>> to no avail.
>>>>
>>>> In your schema.xml, what is the definition of the label field, and the
>>>> fieldType definition of the type used in the label field? That will
>>>> determine exactly how the query is parsed and whether individual words
>>>> will match. I wasn't using dismax or edismax back when I was running
>>>> 1.4, so I can't say anything about how it used to work, only how it
>>>> works now.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shawn
>>>
; "parsedquery": "(+DisjunctionMaxQuery((label:Food^3.0)) ())/no_coord",
>> >> "parsedquery_toString": "+(label:Food^3.0) ()",
>> >> "explain": {},
>> >> "QParser": "DisMaxQParser",
>
; "boostfuncs": null,
> >> ...
> >> }
> >>
> >> I don't understand how/why this doesn't use a "contains" operator.
> >> This was the behavior on the old 1.4 instance. I went through the
> >> changelog for 1.4 to 5.1, but I don't find any explicit information
> >> about dismax behaving differently, except the "mm" parameter needs a
> >> default. I tried many values for mm (including 0, 100%, 100, etc) but
> >> to no avail.
> >
> > In your schema.xml, what is the definition of the label field, and the
> > fieldType definition of the type used in the label field? That will
> > determine exactly how the query is parsed and whether individual words
> > will match. I wasn't using dismax or edismax back when I was running
> > 1.4, so I can't say anything about how it used to work, only how it
> > works now.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shawn
> >
>
o 5.1, but I don't find any explicit information
>> about dismax behaving differently, except the "mm" parameter needs a
>> default. I tried many values for mm (including 0, 100%, 100, etc) but
>> to no avail.
>
> In your schema.xml, what is the definition of the
; parameter needs a
> default. I tried many values for mm (including 0, 100%, 100, etc) but
> to no avail.
In your schema.xml, what is the definition of the label field, and the
fieldType definition of the type used in the label field? That will
determine exactly how the query is parsed and whether individual words
will match. I wasn't using dismax or edismax back when I was running
1.4, so I can't say anything about how it used to work, only how it
works now.
Thanks,
Shawn
Hi all.
Sorry about the title, but I don't know how to be more explicit than
that. I am updating a Solr 1.4 install to Solr 5.1. I went through all
the changes, updated my schema.xml, etc. Everything works (I
re-indexed instead of migrating the existing one). I can search for
documents, no problem
Thanks a lot David.
I will try it ;)
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Change-the-score-of-a-document-based-on-the-value-of-a-multifield-tp4087503p4088145.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
If you want to alter the score in a customized way based on indexed text data
on a per-value basis then index Lucene payloads, and use PayloadTermQuery.
See the javadocs for PayloadTermQuery in particular and follow the
references. This is a bit dated but read this:
http://searchhub.org/2009/08/0
:(
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Change-the-score-of-a-document-based-on-the-value-of-a-multifield-tp4087503p4087666.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Whoa! You've suddenly changed from asking about querying
to DIH. I'll leave DIH to people who understand that way
better than I do.
As for the rest, you won't be able to boost by the values
even after you do get them in a multiValued field, so I think
you'll have problems as you try to carry this
Thanks Erick, but think if I have an simple float value and not distance.
I have a situation like this:
- id: 1
- myText: ["iphone", "ipad", "macbook"]
- myFieldFloat: [3.4,2.1,5.3]
I want to set the value of myFieldFloat at his respective myText.
I tried this:
but it return a
I'm guessing that you'd be best served by changing your
model a bit. It looks like you are somehow doing searches
that center on the airport and arrange businesses of various
types based on how far they are from the airport. But you're
collecting all the businesses in one solr document.
It would w
Ok, agree.
I mean that I want to set a boost to each review/description (multifield) of
the Places (multifield), and this boost is the corrispective value of the
distance beetween the place and the particular kind of place that I have as
document.
Is it clear?
I Try to explain again the situation
-dataimport.xml
> file.
>
> Please, Any suggests?
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Change-the-score-of-a-document-based-on-the-value-of-a-multifield-using-dismax-tp4087503.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
index-time it is easy, but in this case I
don't know which is the right syntax to set the boost into db-dataimport.xml
file.
Please, Any suggests?
Thanks in advance.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Change-the-score-of-a-document-based-on-the-value-of-a-
09-22T22:40:30Z"]&qf=scanneddate
>
> How can I check for the date ranges using solr's dismax query handler
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/query-with-DATE-FIELD-AND-RANGE-query-using-dismax-tp3983819.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
0:30Z"]&qf=scanneddate
How can I check for the date ranges using solr's dismax query handler
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/query-with-DATE-FIELD-AND-RANGE-query-using-dismax-tp3983819.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Otis
Did you see Boss's answer to a similar question about an hour after your
post?
On Dec 9, 2011 2:19 PM, "Otis Gospodnetic"
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there a reason why we have the "lucene" parser baked into Join?
> Is there a way to use (e)DisMax with Join?
>
> For example, when I do this:
>
>
Hi,
Is there a reason why we have the "lucene" parser baked into Join?
Is there a way to use (e)DisMax with Join?
For example, when I do this:
/solr/indexA/select?q={!join fromIndex=indexB from=id to=id}FooBar
Check line 60
in http://search-lucene.com/c/Solr:/core/src/java/org/apache/solr
> From: Erick Erickson
> To: solr-user
> Sent: Mon, Dec 5, 2011 5:52 am
> Subject: Re: two word phrase search using dismax
>
>
> Have you looked at the "pf" (phrase fields)
> parameter of edismax?
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DisMaxQParserP
olves
only 1,4 but 2,3.
Thanks.
Alex.
-Original Message-
From: Erick Erickson
To: solr-user
Sent: Mon, Dec 5, 2011 5:52 am
Subject: Re: two word phrase search using dismax
Have you looked at the "pf" (phrase fields)
parameter of edismax?
http://wiki.apache.org
itle.
> 3. Next, docs with both words in the content.
> 4. And finally docs having either of words in the title and content.
>
> I tried to change mm param to 1<-1 5<-2 6<90%
> This allows to achieve 1,4 but not 2,3
>
> Thanks.
> Alex.
>
>
>
&
either of words in the title and content.
I tried to change mm param to 1<-1 5<-2 6<90%
This allows to achieve 1,4 but not 2,3
Thanks.
Alex.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Hostetter
To: solr-user
Sent: Thu, Nov 17, 2011 2:17 pm
Subject: Re: two word phrase s
: After putting the same score for title and content in qf filed, docs
: with both words in content moved to fifth place. The doc in the first,
: third and fourth places still have only one of the words in content and
: title. The doc in the second place has one of the words in title and
: bot
second place has one of the words in title and both words in the
content but in different places not together.
Thanks.
Alex.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Kuhlmann
To: solr-user
Sent: Tue, Nov 15, 2011 12:20 am
Subject: Re: two word phrase search using dismax
Am 14.11.2011 21:50
Am 14.11.2011 21:50, schrieb alx...@aim.com:
Hello,
I use solr3.4 and nutch 1.3. In request handler we have
2<-1 5<-2 6<90%
As fas as I know this means that for two word phrase search match must be 100%.
However, I noticed that in most cases documents with both words are ranked
around 20 place
OK, i will have to wait till solr 3 release then.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Fuzzy-query-using-dismax-query-parser-tp2727075p2727572.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> I wonder how to conduct fuzzy query using dismax query
> parser? I am able to
> do prefix query with local params and
> prefixQueryParser. But how to handle
> fuzzy query?
>
> I like the behavior of dismax except it does not support
> the prefix query
> and fuzzy
Hi,
I wonder how to conduct fuzzy query using dismax query parser? I am able to
do prefix query with local params and prefixQueryParser. But how to handle
fuzzy query?
I like the behavior of dismax except it does not support the prefix query
and fuzzy query.
Thanks.
cy
--
View this
want, depending on what behavior you want.
&defType=lucene
&q=_query_:"{!dismax qf='field1 field2'}value1" AND _query_:"{!dismax
qf='field3 field4'}more values"
On 3/23/2011 12:38 PM, Gastone Penzo wrote:
Hi,
is it possible, USING DISMAX SEA
Hi,
is it possible, USING DISMAX SEARCH HANDLER, to make a search like:
search value1 in field1 & value 2 in field 2 &??
it's like q=field1:value1 field2:value2 in standard search, but i want to do
this in dismax
Thanx
--
Gastone Penzo
*www.solr-italia.it*
*The first itali
Did i write wt? Oh dear. The q and w are too close =)
> Markus,
>
> Its not wt its qt, wt for response type,
> Also qt is not for Query Parser its for Request Handler ,In solrconfig.xml
> there are many Request Handlers can be Defined using "dismax" Query Parser
> Or
Markus,
Its not wt its qt, wt for response type,
Also qt is not for Query Parser its for Request Handler ,In solrconfig.xml
there are many Request Handlers can be Defined using "dismax" Query Parser
Or Using "lucene" Query Parser.
If you want to change Query parser then its
get
> there.
>
> Markus' comments are if you're specifying a dismax parser entirely on the
> request
> line, not getting to the one you may have defined in solrconfig.xml. Both
> are entirely
> valid ways of using dismax
>
> Best
> Erick
>
> On
uot; and specify qt=erick and get
there.
Markus' comments are if you're specifying a dismax parser entirely on the
request
line, not getting to the one you may have defined in solrconfig.xml. Both
are entirely
valid ways of using dismax
Best
Erick
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:50 AM,
with dismax you must specifiy fields to query upon in the qf parameter and the
value for which you want to search through those fields in q.
defType=lucene&q=poi_id:3
defType=dismax&q=3&qf=poi_id
See the DisMaxQParser wiki for more
On Tuesday 18 January 2011 15:50:34 Tri Nguyen wrote:
> Hi,
>
Hi,
Maybe I'm missing something obvious.
I'm trying to use the dismax parser and it doesn't seem like I'm using it
properly.
When I do this:
http://localhost:8080/solr/cs/select?q=(poi_id:3)
I get a row returned.
When I incorporate dismax and say mm=1, no results get returned.
http://loc
&
facet.offset=0&
facet.field=str_brand&
facet.field=grandparent_category_id
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Querying-Solr-using-dismax-requested-field-not-showing-up-in-debug-score-boosts-tp1829456p1831414.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
is could be?
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Querying-Solr-using-dismax-requested-field-not-showing-up-in-debug-score-boosts-tp1829456p1829456.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
see the boost I am applying to that field taking effect in the debug output
of the solr query.
Does anyone have an idea of why this could be?
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Querying-Solr-using-dismax-requested-field-not-showing-up-in-debug-score-boosts-tp1829
Thanks Jonathan. FQ seems promising. I will give it a go.
Swapnonil Mukherjee
On 26-Oct-2010, at 7:29 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
> So, first of all, "exact" match is hard in Solr on tokenized fields.
> Tokenized fields don't really do that. So for exact match, you should
> probably use
So, first of all, "exact" match is hard in Solr on tokenized fields.
Tokenized fields don't really do that. So for exact match, you should
probably use a non-tokenized field (string or text with keywordtokenizer
(which should really be called the non-tokenizer)). If there's only one
token in
Hi Everybody,
Let me give you a brief idea of our Solr document. We have about 6 text type
fields, each containing IPTC data extracted from photos. Search is performed
mostly on these 6 fields.
We also have a mutlivalue field named group_id that contains a list of all the
group_ids that have a
: So I add a fq param to filter the results by the chosen facet. This
: seems logical, but the number of search results I get is NOT the same as
: the count against the facet.
can you give us some specific examples? Ie: show us a URL, show us
the requestHandler config for the handler used in
I am retrieving facet counts against a specific column in my index and these
look accurate. The query for retrieving these counts is also running a dismax
search using the q param (against 4 columns in my index, 1 of which I am facet
counting on as mentioned above).
So far, so good.
There will always be edge cases and the parser cannot be all things to
all people. Most applications have an application layer that create
the actual Solr query, and that is where you'll have to handle this
one.
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 8:25 AM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
>
> On 13.06.2010, at 17:20
On 13.06.2010, at 17:20, Erick Erickson wrote:
> << work on my end to handle dash both as a special and as a normal char.>>>
>
> And how would the code know? You're essentially asking for DWIM (Do What I
> Mean) functionality, which I've been awaiting for many years
>
> It seems a reasonabl
<<>>
I don't think so. Removing would mean that the same exact match search would
match documents with and without hyphens. I.e. searching for "my - way"
would match either
original content of "my way" or "my - way". Whereas escaping the hyphen
would cause only the correct exact match to be returne
On 13.06.2010, at 16:57, Erick Erickson wrote:
> Have you tried escaping the dashes? Your dismax definition
> and the output from the analysis admin page would also help.
sure .. escaping ends up being the same as removing. but i guess it would be
the better approach of course. but still is th
Have you tried escaping the dashes? Your dismax definition
and the output from the analysis admin page would also help.
Best
Erick
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am using dismax on solr 1.4 and I am running into an issue with fields
> that
Hi,
I am using dismax on solr 1.4 and I am running into an issue with fields that
contain dash chars:
Foo-Bar - Company
Now if someone searches for exactly "Foo-Bar - Company" the resulting dismax
query would disallow "Company" when trying to find a match.
Obviously I c
Is this at the broker or the shard? If it is at the shard, does the
log record the full stack trace of the parsing exception?
Do simpler function queries work?
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> Adding it to the main core looks like it works, without the dismax handler
> even
Adding it to the main core looks like it works, without the dismax
handler even present in the live core config. It won't take the bf
value that I described, though.
recip(ms(NOW,product(post_date,1000)),3.17e-11,1,1)
This spits an error:
Problem accessing /solr/main/select. Reason:
und
The query is at the broker level, and is included in the distributed
search. You can't place in the shard, because the distributed search
shortcuts the query handlers (I think).
On 4/11/10, Shawn Heisey wrote:
> I am using a setup where I have specified the shards parameter in a
> broker called "
I am using a setup where I have specified the shards parameter in a
broker called "main", which then queries a bunch of other machines
including the one it's on, using the core named "live."
true
6000
explicit
50
name="shards">idxinc:8983/solr/live,idxst0-b:8983/solr/live,idxst1-b:8983/solr/l
ld_a:54"
>
> adding a boost value "^1" to a negated clause doesn't do much (except
> maybe make hte queryNorm really wacky)
>
>
> -Hoss
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/weird-behaviour-when-setting-negative-boost-with-bq-using-dismax-tp27406614p27461856.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
: bq=(*:* -field_a:54^1)
I think what you want there is bq=(*:* -field_a:54)^1
...you are "boosting" things that don't match "field_a:54"
adding a boost value "^1" to a negated clause doesn't do much (except
maybe make hte queryNorm really wacky)
-Hoss
happen is that results that
>> match
>> field_a:54 are excluded. Just like doing:
>>
>> fq=-field_a:54
>>
>> Any idea what could be happening? Has anyone experienced this behaviour
>> before?
>> Thnaks in advance
>> --
>> View this message in co
g? Has anyone experienced this behaviour
> before?
> Thnaks in advance
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://old.nabble.com/weird-behabiour-when-setting-negative-boost-with-bq-using-dismax-tp27406614p27406614.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
--
Lance Norskog
goks...@gmail.com
ative-boost-with-bq-using-dismax-tp27406614p27406614.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
: 2<-25%
: my query is = monty+python+scandal
: i just issue monty+python i get bunch of documents but when i issue
: monty+python+scandal then i just get 1. isn't the case that i should
: get documents which match monty+python+scandal then followed by
: documents that match monty+pytho
Hi,
i have this config in my solrconfig.xml
explicit
0
field1^1.1 field2^1.2 field3^1.3 field4^1.4 field5^1.5
field4^1.4 field5^1.5
1
2<-25%
my query is = monty+python+scandal
when
i just issue monty+python i
aw, of course... the standard query parameters can be used with
dismax... sorry for the silly question!
- bram
--
http://www.freesound.org
http://www.smartelectronix.com
http://www.musicdsp.org
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:59 AM, climbingrose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Bram,
> You can use
Hi Bram,
You can use filter query (fq) to limit your results:
fq=tag:sometag&q=user_input_here
Have a look at dismax and standard query documentation on the wiki.
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Bram de Jong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hello all,
>
> I would like to combine the DisMaxReques
hello all,
I would like to combine the DisMaxRequestHandler for processing user
searches, but I would like the -aditionally- add more query
parameters.
For example, the user want to search inside all the documents tagged
with one particular tag (a tag he clicked).
So, I would like to define: reg
ield_id:[* TO *].
I saw there was a discussion about this in February and I was
wondering if there's been any changes. Can I retrieve all records
using dismax? I could use the std one when there's no query but we're
building a white-label portal which should boost specific fields all
the
scussion about this in February and I was
> wondering if there's been any changes. Can I retrieve all records
> using dismax? I could use the std one when there's no query but we're
> building a white-label portal which should boost specific fields all
> the time,
from solr. This approach
doesn't work with dismax however. Nor [* TO *] or field_id:[* TO *].
I saw there was a discussion about this in February and I was
wondering if there's been any changes. Can I retrieve all records
using dismax? I could use the std one when there'
: AND does not controll scoring, only matching. If you want dismax to
: be purely additive, pass tie=1.0 to the handler.
more specificly: the defaultOperator option in the schema.xml does not
affect the dismax parser used on the q param at all (only the stock
SolrQueryParser used for things like
On 4/26/07, escher2k <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am trying to search across multiple fields using the AND operator. Somehow,
when the results
are returned, the score seems to be retrieving the max value and not really
adding them up. In
the example given below, the value that is returned (825)
(past_proj_name:php)=5) 1.0 = idf(docFreq=301) 1.5 =
fieldNorm(field=past_proj_name, doc=36638)
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Additive-scoring-using-Dismax...-tf3653265.html#a10205762
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 12/2/06, Stephanie Belton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: more specificly, you are putting your entire search in quotes, which is
: causing it to be treated as a single searchable entity across several
: fields -- a single DisjunctionMaxQuery, instead of multiple disjunctions
: wrapped in a boole
: more specificly, you are putting your entire search in quotes, which is
: causing it to be treated as a single searchable entity across several
: fields -- a single DisjunctionMaxQuery, instead of multiple disjunctions
: wrapped in a boolean. When that quoted chunk of text is analyzed by your
:
Thank you for your message Yonik, that was very helpful. I didn't have much
luck with the SnowballPorterFilterFactory so I wrote my own factory last night
and as you said it gives me much more flexibility. Here it is for anyone who's
interested:
package myApp;
import org.apache.lucene.analysis
: You are including the russian stemmed fields in the dismax query, and
: the analysis of those fields discards numbers, hence 1970 is ignored,
: right? Either querying only the literals, or fixing the stemmed text
: to not discard numbers may help (or get you further along at least).
more speci
On 11/30/06, Stephanie Belton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am using Solr to index and search documents in Russian. I have successfully
set up the RussianAnalyzer but found that it eliminates some tokens such as
numbers.
You can get better control (and avoid having numbers removed)
by using To
Hello,
I am using Solr to index and search documents in Russian. I have successfully
set up the RussianAnalyzer but found that it eliminates some tokens such as
numbers. I am therefore indexing my text fields in 2 ways, once with a quite
literal version of the text using something similar to te
77 matches
Mail list logo
