Such a negation works just as one would expect.
q=*:*
<result name="response" numFound="158" start="0">
q=*:*&fq=-type:text/html
<result name="response" numFound="25" start="0">
q=*:*&fq=type:text/html
<result name="response" numFound="133" start="0">
Well, that adds up , doesn't it ;)
> 1. I don't think Solr will re-use the filter cache in that situation,
> although I'm not sure. But I comment anyway because, not what you asked
> but something else that will trip you up with your example:
>
> 2. In fact, a pure-negative query like that doesn't work _at all_ in the
> default solr/lucene query parser used for 'fq', at least in Solr 1.4.1.
> Not sure if it's been improved in 3.1, but I don't think so. It will
> always return 0 hits, the solr/lucene query parser can't generate a
> proper lucene query from a pure negative query like that.
>
> To get around this, you can find a variation the query that means the
> same thing but isn't that form. Here's a really ugly one I use, with a
> nested dismax -- dismax ALSO has trouble with pure negatives, although I
> think maybe edismax can handle em? But this weird as heck combo works,
> maybe there's a better way.
>
> NOT _query_:"{!dismax qf=something}history"
>
> And to come around full circle, I have NO idea what effect nested
> queries have on the filter cache. I think that STILL won't re-use the
> filter cache.... but I wonder if it'll re-use the _query_ cache for
> "history"? I forget even more how the query cache works though.
>
> On 5/17/2011 6:07 PM, Burton-West, Tom wrote:
> > If I have a query with a filter query such as : " q=art&fq=history" and
> > then run a second query "q=art&fq=-history", will Solr realize that it
> > can use the cached results of the previous filter query "history" (in
> > the filter cache) or will it not realize this and have to actually do a
> > second filter query against the index for "not history"?
> >
> > Tom
