I also have problems getting the solrspellchecker to utilise existing FQ params correctly. we have some fairly monster queries
eg : http://pastebin.com/4XzGpfeC I cannot seem to get our FQ parameters to be honored when generating results. In essence i am getting collations that yield no results when the filter query is applied. We have items that are by default not shown when out of stock or forthcoming. the user can select whether to show these or not. Is there something wrong with my query or perhaps my use case is not supported? Im using nested query and local params etc Would very much appreciate some assistance on this one as 2days worth of hacking, and pestering people on IRC have not yet yeilded a solution for me. Im not even sure what i am trying is even possible! Some sort of clarification on this would really help! Cheers Nick... On 29 May 2013 15:57, Andy Lester <a...@petdance.com> wrote: > > On May 29, 2013, at 9:46 AM, "Dyer, James" <james.d...@ingramcontent.com> > wrote: > > > Just an instanity check, I see I had misspelled "maxCollations" as > "maxCollation" in my prior response. When you tested with this set the > same as "maxCollationTries", did you correct my spelling? > > Yes, definitely. > > Thanks for the ticket. I am looking at the effects of turning on > spellcheck.onlyMorePopular to true, which reduces the number of collations > it seems to do, but doesn't affect the underlying question of "is the > spellchecker doing FQs properly?" > > Thanks, > Andy > > -- > Andy Lester => a...@petdance.com => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance > > -- Nick Fellows DJdownload.com ----------------------------------- 10 Greenland Street London NW10ND United Kingdom ----------------------------------- n...@djdownload.com (E) ----------------------------------- www.djdownload.com
