Anuvenk,
Sorry for this "Third" email, but I was reading your question below and I think
it warrants yet another reply.
Just some background from my focus and involvement, and hence the generation of
the JavaDocs. I was primarily interested in having a Solr based spell checker
that behaved more like a traditional spell checker. In my application, when I
generated the input in to Solr for inclusion of the spell checker indexer, I
was only interested in single words and not multi-word sets. My intentions was
to send multiple words to the handler and have it return details on each word
as it stands independently when the parameter multiWords was set, otherwise it
was to use all input words as a single check against the handler. As such, in
my original efforts, I had no multiple words in a single term, as you were
asking below. That is not to say it is not possible, but I just wanted to let
you know the original focus of my work.
I did look a little closer at the JavaDocs and it looks like they have been
updated from what I originally generated. So perhaps they may be up to date?
One thing I would like to point out, is that I put some efforts in creating a
test case for the SpellCheckerRequestHandler. If it still exists (I have not
checked the head for a long time) then it would be a good starting point to do
some simple testing with limited data sets of your own. Just make a copy of
it, and then feed in multi-word terms and see how it responds do the different
settings. This will also allow you to play around with the configuration
settings in the schema and solrconfig files without impacting your actual Solr
instance and the turn around time could be in the seconds and not minutes with
each alteration of a new test.
The locations in svn and file names of the unit tests that I created were:
/test/test-files/solr/conf/schema-spellchecker.xml
/test/test-files/solr/conf/solrconfig-spellchecker.xml
/test/org/apache/solr/handler/SpellCheckerRequestHandlerTest.java
If these do not existing in svn currently, let me know and I can pass along the
contents and you can recreate them locally to test with.
Best of luck,
Scott Tabar
---- anuvenk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks. But i'm looking at this
http://.../spellchecker?indent=on&onlyMorePopular=true&accuracy=.6&suggestionCount=20&q=facial+salophosphoprotein
on
http://lucene.apache.org/solr/api/org/apache/solr/handler/SpellCheckerRequestHandler.html
It seems to return results (well in the example)
with and without extendedResults=true
does it mean that 'facial salophosphoprotein' was a single term in the
index.
hossman wrote:
>
> :
> : I did try with the latest nightly build and followed the steps outlined
> in
> : http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SpellCheckerRequestHandler
> : with regards to creating new catchall field 'spell' of type 'spell' and
> : copied my text fields to 'spell' at index time.
> : Still q=grapics returns 'graphics'
> : but q=grapics card returns nothing.
> : But the same queries return the correct spelling with string fieldtypes.
> : Any fix available?
>
> I don't think Otis was suggesting any specific fix was available in the
> nightly builds, i believe he was just addressing specificly that if there
> was a bug someone commited a fix for you didnt' need to wait for 1.3 --
> you can test it now using the nightly builds.
>
> That said: I don't see any currently open or recent resolved bugs
> related to spellchecking and multiple words ... i believe (but i'm not
> 100% positive) that "multi word" spell correction will work, as long as
> your dictionary contaisn those "multiple words" as individual "terms"
>
> ie: if you want "graphics card" to be a suggestion for "grapics card" then
> you need to use a termSourceField in which "graphics card" is a single
> term (either because it is untokenized, or maybe because you use a
> word-based ngram tokenfilter, etc...)
>
> alternately, if you want to get "graphics asdfghjk" as a suggestion for
> "grapics asdfghjk" (even though "asdfghjk" isn't in your index at all),
> hiting the spellcorrection handler for each input word individually is
> probably your best bet.
>
>
> : > You don't need to wait for 1.3 to be released - you can simply use a
> : > recent nightly build.
>
>
> -Hoss
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/spellcheckhandler-tp14627712p15100704.html
Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
