On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 5:16 PM, David Smiley @MITRE.org
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Curious... Why is ConstantScoreQuery only applied to prefix queries?  Your
> rationale suggests that it is also applicable wildcard query and fuzzy query
> too (basically any place an analyzer isn't used).

I think fuzzy queries may have been fixed in lucene to not exceed the
boolean query clause limit.
WildCard queries: no good reason... didn't really need it, so I never
got around to it :-)

-Yonik

> ~ David Smiley
>
>
> Yonik Seeley wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Head <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Using the StandardRequestHandler, it appears that the index boost values
>>> are
>>>  ignored when the query has a wildcard in it.   For example, if I have 2
>>>  <doc>'s and one has a boost of 1.0 and another has a boost of 10.0, then
>>> I
>>>  do a search for "bob*", both records will be returned with the same
>>> score of
>>>  1.0.   If I just do a normal search then the <doc> that has the higher
>>> boost
>>>  has the higher score as expected.
>>>
>>>  Is this a bug?
>>
>> A feature :-)
>> Solr uses ConstantScoreRangeQuery and ConstantScorePrefixQuery to
>> avoid getting exceptions from too many terms.
>>
>> -Yonik
>>
>>
>>>  ~Tom
>>>
>>>  p.s. Here's what my debug looks like:
>>>
>>>  <str name="id=24279,internal_docid=2180">
>>>  1.0 = (MATCH)
>>>  ConstantScoreQuery([EMAIL PROTECTED]), product
>>> of:
>>>   1.0 = boost
>>>   1.0 = queryNorm
>>>  </str>
>>>  <str name="id=24317,internal_docid=2217">
>>>  1.0 = (MATCH)
>>>  ConstantScoreQuery([EMAIL PROTECTED]), product
>>> of:
>>>   1.0 = boost
>>>   1.0 = queryNorm
>>>  </str>
>>>  --
>>>  View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/boost-ignored-with-wildcard-queries-tp15703334p15703334.html
>>>  Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://www.nabble.com/boost-ignored-with-wildcard-queries-tp15703334p17701306.html
> Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

Reply via email to