On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Nagelberg, Kallin <knagelb...@globeandmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Yonik, I was just looking at that actually. > Trying something like recip(ms(NOW,datetime),3.16e-11,1,1)^10 now.
I'd also recommend looking into a multiplicative boost too - IMO they normally make more sense. http://wiki.apache.org/solr/SolrRelevancyFAQ#How_can_I_boost_the_score_of_newer_documents -Yonik http://www.lucidimagination.com > My 'inspiration' for the ord method was actually the Solr 1.4 Enterprise > Search server book. Page 126 has a section 'using reciprocals and rord with > dates'. You should let those guys know what's up! > > Thanks, > Kallin. > > -----Original Message----- > From: ysee...@gmail.com [mailto:ysee...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Yonik Seeley > Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:23 AM > To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: ord on TrieDateField always returning max > > Besides using up a lot more memory, ord() isn't even going to work for > a field with multiple tokens indexed per value (like tdate). > I'd recommend using a function on the date value itself. > http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FunctionQuery#ms > > -Yonik > http://www.lucidimagination.com > > > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Nagelberg, Kallin > <knagelb...@globeandmail.com> wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> I've been trying to add a date based boost to my queries. I have a field >> like: >> >> <fieldType name="tdate" class="solr.TrieDateField" omitNorms="true" >> precisionStep="6" positionIncrementGap="0"/> >> <field name="datetime" type="tdate" indexed="true" stored="true" >> required="true" /> >> >> When I look at the datetime field in the solr schema browser I can see that >> there are 9051 distinct dates. >> >> When I try to add the parameter to my query like: bf=ord(datetime) (on a >> dismax query) I always get 9051 as the result of the function. I see this in >> the debug data: >> >> >> 1698.6041 = (MATCH) FunctionQuery(top(ord(datetime))), product of: >> >> 9051.0 = 9051 >> >> 1.0 = boost >> >> 0.18767032 = queryNorm >> >> >> >> It is exactly the same for every result, even though each result has a >> different value for datetime. >> >> >> >> Does anyone have any suggestions as to why this could be happening? I have >> done extensive googling with no luck. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Kallin Nagelberg. >> >> >
