Could you clarify what you mean by "Lucene reverse index"? That's not a term I am familiar with.
-- Jack Krupansky On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 1:01 AM, Ali Nazemian <alinazem...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Jack, > Thank you very much. > Yeah I was thinking of function query for sorting, but I have to problems > in this case, 1) function query do the process at query time which I dont > want to. 2) I also want to have the score field for retrieving and showing > to users. > > Dear Alexandre, > Here is some more explanation about the business behind the question: > I am going to provide a field for each document, lets refer it as > "document_score". I am going to fill this field based on the information > that could be extracted from Lucene reverse index. Assume I have a list of > terms, called important terms and I am going to extract the term frequency > for each of the terms inside this list per each document. To be honest I > want to use the term frequency for calculating "document_score". > "document_score" should be storable since I am going to retrieve this field > for each document. I also want to do sorting on "document_store" in case of > preferred by user. > I hope I did convey my point. > Best regards. > > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Jack Krupansky <jack.krupan...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > Won't function queries do the job at query time? You can add or multiply > > the tf*idf score by a function of the term frequency of arbitrary terms, > > using the tf, mul, and add functions. > > > > See: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Function+Queries > > > > -- Jack Krupansky > > > > On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Ali Nazemian <alinazem...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Dear Jack, > > > Hi, > > > I think you misunderstood my need. I dont want to change the default > > > scoring behavior of Lucene (tf-idf) I just want to have another field > to > > do > > > sorting for some specific queries (not all the search business), > however > > I > > > am aware of Lucene payload. > > > Thank you very much. > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Jack Krupansky < > > jack.krupan...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > You would do that with a custom similarity (scoring) class. That's an > > > > expert feature. In fact a SUPER-expert feature. > > > > > > > > Start by completely familiarizing yourself with how TF*IDF > similarity > > > > already works: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://lucene.apache.org/core/4_10_3/core/org/apache/lucene/search/similarities/TFIDFSimilarity.html > > > > > > > > And to use your custom similarity class in Solr: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/solr/Other+Schema+Elements#OtherSchemaElements-Similarity > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Jack Krupansky > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Ali Nazemian <alinazem...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi everybody, > > > > > > > > > > I am going to add some analysis to Solr at the index time. Here is > > > what I > > > > > am considering in my mind: > > > > > Suppose I have two different fields for Solr schema, field "a" and > > > field > > > > > "b". I am going to use the created reverse index in a way that some > > > terms > > > > > are considered as important ones and tell lucene to calculate a > value > > > > based > > > > > on these terms frequency per each document. For example let the > word > > > > > "hello" considered as important word with the weight of "2.0". > > Suppose > > > > the > > > > > term frequency for this word at field "a" is 3 and at field "b" is > 6 > > > for > > > > > document 1. Therefor the score value would be 2*3+(2*6)^2. I want > to > > > > > calculate this score based on these fields and put it in the index > > for > > > > > retrieving. My question would be how can I do such thing? First I > did > > > > > consider using term component for calculating this value from > outside > > > and > > > > > put it back to Solr index, but it seems it is not efficient enough. > > > > > > > > > > Thank you very much. > > > > > Best regards. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > A.Nazemian > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > A.Nazemian > > > > > > > > > -- > A.Nazemian >
