In this case, the boost and fields in the "qf" parameter won't be
considered for the search. With this query Solr will search for documents
with the terms "this" and/or (depending on your default operator) "that" in
the field1 and the term "other" in the field2

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Robert Brown <r...@intelcompute.com> wrote:

> Thanks Tomás,
>
> My example should have read...
>
> q=+(field1:this field1:that) +(field2:other)
>
> I'm using edismax.
>
> so with this approach, the boosts as specified in solrconfig qf will
> remain in place?
>
>
> ---
>
> IntelCompute
> Web Design & Local Online Marketing
>
> http://www.intelcompute.com
>
> On Mon, 5 Dec 2011 09:17:59 -0300, Tomás Fernández Löbbe
> <tomasflo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Robert, the answer depends on the query parser you are using. If you
> are
> > using the "edismax" query parser, then the "qf" will only be used when
> you
> > don't specify any field in the "q" parameter. In your example the result
> > query will be, boolean queries for "this" and "that" in the field1 and a
> > DisMax query for the term "other" in fields (and the boost) you specify
> in
> > qf.
> >
> > If you use "dismax" the field in the query will not be considered and if
> > you use LuceneQP the qf are not considered and it is going to use the
> > default search field for the term "other" and no boost.
> >
> > You can see this very easily turning on the "debugQuery".
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Tomás
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Robert Brown <r...@intelcompute.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> If I have a set list in solrconfig for my "qf" along with their boosts,
> >> and I then specify field names directly in q (where I could also
> override
> >> the boosts), are the boosts left in place, or reset to 1?
> >>
> >>
> >> <str name="qf">
> >>  this^3
> >>  that^2
> >>  other^9
> >> </str>
> >>
> >>
> >> ie q=field1:+(this that) +(other)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> IntelCompute
> >> Web Design & Local Online Marketing
> >>
> >> http://www.intelcompute.com
> >>
> >>
>
>

Reply via email to