On Jun 6, 2009, at 9:52 PM, Thanh Doan wrote:
webapp=/solr path=/select
params={facet=true&fl=pk_i,score&facet.mincount=1&q=([*+TO+*]+AND+*
cat2_facet:Top+Wear*)+AND+
(type_s:Item
)&facet
.limit
=-1&facet.field=cat1_facet&facet.field=cat2_facet&qt=standard&wt=ruby}
*hits=0* status=0 QTime=1
Hello,
I am having problems with the dismax request handler and highlighting.
The following query works as intended
http://localhost:8983/solr/select?indent=on&q=myquery&start=0&rows=10&fl=id%2Cscore&qt=standard&wt=standard&hl=true&hl.fl=myfield
whereas
http://localhost:8983/solr/select?indent=
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Yao Ge wrote:
> If I want use OR operator with mutile query filters, I can do:
> fq=popularity:[10 TO *] OR section:0
> Is there a more effecient alternative to this?
There is not currently a more efficient way to do this. But esp with
multi-select support now in
I'm trying to write a very simple SearchComponent that performs a simple
operation on the query string before passing through to QueryComponent.
The EncodingSearchComponent will perform something like the following
Base64(MD5(querystring))
Now that I plan on adding new fields based on the data already present, it
would be best to read the existing field after it has been processed
(cleaned up) by the other analyzers.
I was therefore planning on creating a custom analyzer that is started after
the other default ones have been run; sa
I had the same problem - I think the answer is that highlighting is
not currently supported with q.alt and dismax.
http://www.nabble.com/bug--No-highlighting-results-with-dismax-and-q.alt%3D*%3A*-td23438048.html#a23438048
-Peter
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Fouad Mardini wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
what is ${db.tableA.id} ?
I think there is something extra in that
can you paste the whole data-config.xml?
can you paste
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 1:09 AM, gateway0 wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I tried to do the following:
>
> "
>
>
>
>
>
> "
>
> So I use the SQL Table Field "id" twice once for
I'm 100% sure about that :)
On Jun 5, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Avlesh Singh wrote:
My bad! Please ignore the previous reply.
I just read your mail again to realize that there is a problem.
Are you sure that the case (upper/lower) in your query and index
match? Any
difference in cases would not fetc
