Fwiw, we ended up preferring the 4.x spellcheck approach. For starters, it is supported by SolrJ ... :-)
But more importantly, we wanted a mix of both terms and field values in our suggestions. We found the Suggester component doesn't do that. We also weren't interested in matching in the middle of words. Partial prefix matching was better and, thus, we used an ngram query. In addition, we liked the Amazon style "xyz in Dept X, xyz in Dept Y" suggestions, which we used facets in combination with the ngram query to produce. Finally, we needed to make a minor patch to get document frequency information about terms (and collations) provided by the SpellCheckComponent. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7144 So, to summarize, we ended up with a 2-pass suggestion approach: pass 1: spellcheck with document frequency and collation using WFSTLookupFactory and org.apache.solr.spelling.suggest.Suggester. pass 2: if spellcheck has corrections?, use 1st correction instead of original term as query for against an ngram field (using copyTo to populate from fields we care about). This query also has a field facet. The facet values are used as "${queryTerm} in ${facet}" suggestions. Specified fields from matching docs are used as suggestions (like the suggester component). Please don't take this to mean you should be doing anything like what we are doing. But, rather, I'm urging you to dig deeper into your suggestion functionality and think hard about what really makes sense for your application. It's a major usability issue for search apps. -----Original Message----- From: O. Olson [mailto:olson_...@yahoo.it] Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 4:19 PM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Trying to get AnalyzingInfixSuggester to work in Solr? Thank you Erick. I'm sorry I did not mention this earlier, but I am still on Solr 4.10.3. Once I upgrade to Solr 5.0+ , I would consider your suggestion in your blog post. O. O. Erick Erickson wrote > Uh, you mean because I forgot to pate in the URL? Siiggggh... > > Anyway, the URL is irrelevant now that you've solved your problem, but > in case you're interested: > http://lucidworks.com/blog/solr-suggester/ > > Sorry for the confusion. > Erick -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Trying-to-get-AnalyzingInfixSuggester-to-work-in-Solr-tp4204163p4204392.html Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ************************************************************************* This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. TIAA-CREF *************************************************************************
