Erick,
correct me if the following's wrong, but if you have a custom query parser
configured to preprocess your searches, you'd need to send the
corresponding bit of the search in the q= parameter, rather than fq=
parameter. In that sense, q and fq are not exactly equal.
Dmitry
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hmmm, not quite.
>
> AFAIK, anything you can put in a q clause can also be put in an fq
> clause. So it's not a matter of whether your search is precise or not
> that you should use for determining whether to use a q or fq clause.
> What _should_ influence this is whether docs that satisfy the clause
> should contribute to ranking.
>
> fq clauses do NOT contribute to ranking. They determine whether the
> doc is returned at all.
> q clauses contribute to the ranking.
>
> Additionally, the results of fq clauses are cached and may be re-used.
>
> That said, since fq clauses are often used in conjunction with
> faceting, they are very often used more precisely. But it's still a
> matter of caching and ranking that should determine where the clause
> goes.
>
> FWIW,
> Erick
>
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 9:09 PM, manju16832003 <manju16832...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > The *fq* is used for searching more deterministic results something like
> > WHERE type={}
> > Where as *q* is something like WHERE type like '%%'
> >
> > user *fq*, if your are sure of what your going to search
> > use *q*, if not sure what your trying to search
> >
> > If you are using fq and if you do not get any matching documents, solr
> > throws 0 or error message
> > where q would try to match nearest documents for your search query
> >
> > That's what I have experienced so far. :-).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Using-fq-as-OR-tp4137411p4137525.html
> > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--
Dmitry Kan
Blog: http://dmitrykan.blogspot.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/dmitrykan
