Steve - please include a broad description of this feature in the next CHANGES.txt. I will forget about this thread but need to be reminded of why i could need it :)
Thanks, Markus -----Original message----- > From:Steve Rowe <sar...@gmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday 5th April 2017 23:26 > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Solr Shingle is not working properly in solr 6.5.0 > > Aman, > > In forthcoming Solr 6.5.1, this problem will be addressed by setting a new > <fieldtype> option named “enableGraphQueries” to “false". > > Your fieldtype will look like this: > > ----- > <fieldType name="cust_shingle" class=“solr.TextField" > positionIncrementGap=“100” enableGraphQueries=“false”> > <analyzer> > <tokenizer class="solr.StandardTokenizerFactory"/> > <filter class="solr.ShingleFilterFactory" outputUnigrams=“false" > maxShingleSize="4”/> > <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory”/> > </analyzer> > </fieldType> > ----- > > -- > Steve > www.lucidworks.com > > > On Apr 4, 2017, at 5:32 PM, Steve Rowe <sar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Aman, > > > > I’ve created <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10423> for this > > problem. > > > > -- > > Steve > > www.lucidworks.com > > > >> On Mar 31, 2017, at 7:34 AM, Aman Deep Singh <amandeep.coo...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Rich, > >> Query creation is correct only thing what causing the problem is that > >> Boolean + query while building the lucene query which causing all tokens to > >> be matched in the document (equivalent of mm=100%) even though I use mm=1 > >> it was using BOOLEAN + query as > >> normal query one plus one abc > >> Lucene query - > >> +(((+nameShingle:one plus +nameShingle:plus one +nameShingle:one abc)) > >> ((+nameShingle:one plus +nameShingle:plus one abc)) ((+nameShingle:one plus > >> one +nameShingle:one abc)) (nameShingle:one plus one abc)) > >> > >> Now since my doc contains only one plus one thus -- > >> one plus ,plus one, one plus one > >> thus due to Boolean + it was not matching. > >> Thanks, > >> Aman Deep Singh > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 4:41 PM Rick Leir <rl...@leirtech.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Aman > >>> Did you try the Admin Analysis tool? It will show you which filters are > >>> effective at index and query time. It will help you understand why you are > >>> not getting a mach. > >>> Cheers -- Rick > >>> > >>> On March 31, 2017 2:36:33 AM EDT, Aman Deep Singh < > >>> amandeep.coo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> I was trying to use the shingle filter but it was not creating the > >>>> query as > >>>> desirable. > >>>> > >>>> my schema is > >>>> <fieldType name="cust_shingle" class="solr.TextField" > >>>> positionIncrementGap= > >>>> "100"> <analyzer> <tokenizer class="solr.StandardTokenizerFactory"/> > >>>> <filter > >>>> class="solr.ShingleFilterFactory" outputUnigrams="false" > >>>> maxShingleSize="4" > >>>> /> <filter class="solr.LowerCaseFilterFactory"/> </analyzer> > >>>> </fieldType> > >>>> <field name="nameShingle" type="cust_shingle" indexed="true" > >>>> stored="true"/> > >>>> > >>>> my solr query is > >>>> > >>> http://localhost:8983/solr/productCollection/select?defType=edismax&debugQuery=true&q=one%20plus%20one%20four&qf=nameShingle&; > >>>> *sow=false*&wt=xml > >>>> > >>>> and it was creating the parsed query as > >>>> <str name="parsedquery"> > >>>> (+(DisjunctionMaxQuery(((+nameShingle:one plus +nameShingle:plus one > >>>> +nameShingle:one four))) DisjunctionMaxQuery(((+nameShingle:one plus > >>>> +nameShingle:plus one four))) DisjunctionMaxQuery(((+nameShingle:one > >>>> plus > >>>> one +nameShingle:one four))) DisjunctionMaxQuery((nameShingle:one plus > >>>> one > >>>> four)))~1)/no_coord > >>>> </str> > >>>> <str name="parsedquery_toString"> > >>>> *+((((+nameShingle:one plus +nameShingle:plus one +nameShingle:one > >>>> four)) > >>>> ((+nameShingle:one plus +nameShingle:plus one four)) ((+nameShingle:one > >>>> plus one +nameShingle:one four)) (nameShingle:one plus one four))~1)* > >>>> </str> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> So ideally token creations is perfect but in the query it is using > >>>> boolean + operator which is causing the problem as if i have a document > >>>> with name as > >>>> "one plus one" ,according to the shingles it has to matched as its > >>>> token > >>>> will be ("one plus","one plus one","plus one") . > >>>> I have tried using the q.op and played around the mm also but nothing > >>>> is > >>>> giving me the correct response. > >>>> Any idea how i can fetch that document even if the document is missing > >>>> any > >>>> token. > >>>> > >>>> My expected response will be getting the document > >>>> "one plus one" even the user query has any additional term like "one > >>>> plus > >>>> one two" and so on. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Aman Deep Singh > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > > >
