You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-user@lucene.apache.org by Erik Fäßler <er...@uni-jena.de> on 2011/04/19 21:59:27 UTC
Solr 1.4.1: Weird query results
Hallo there,
my issue qualifies as newbie question I guess, but I'm really a bit
confused. I have an index which has not been created by Solr. Perhaps
that's already the point although I fail to see why this should be an
issue with my problem.
I use the admin interface to check which results particular queries
bring in. My index documents have a field "text" which holds the
document text. This text has only been white space tokenized. So in my
schema, the type for this field is "text_ws". My schema says
"<defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField>".
When I now search for, say, 'marine' (without quotes), I don't get any
search results. But when I search '"marine"' (that is, embraced by
double quotes) I get my document hits. Alternatively, I can prepend the
field name: 'text:marine' and will also get my results.
Similar with this phrase query: "marine mussels", where "In marine
mussels of the genus" is a text snippet of a document. The phrase
"marine mussels" won't give any hits. Searching for 'text:"marine
mussels"' will give me the exact document containing this text snippet.
I'm sure this has quite a simple explanation but I'm unable to find it
right now ;-) Perhaps you can help with that.
Thanks a lot!
Best regards,
Erik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Solr 1.4.1: Weird query results
Posted by Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>.
This is all very strange. I guess I only have a few suggestions:
> It might be worth getting a copy of Luke. Under th "tools" menu
there's a "checkindex" option that may show you something. You
can also use Luke to query your index and examine it. That said,
Luke uses Lucene, not Solr so I rather expect it to show you that
everything's fine...
> Is there any chance at all you have some older jars mixed in?
Frankly this is just me resorting to mysticism because that
doesn't seem very likely to cause appending &debugQuery=on
to change the search results! I'd expect much worse
problems.
> As you said, re-indexing should fix things up. But there's no reason
that I know of that this should be necessary given what you describe.
good luck, because I'm stumped!
Erick
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Erik Fäßler <er...@uni-jena.de> wrote:
> Oooops, I have to take something back: The index *has* been created with
> Lucene 2.9.3! Sorry for confusing that, I am using two different index
> versions, the older for productive purposes and the newer for what I am
> developing currently. I just checked back with Luke, he acknowledges that
> the index used with my Solr instance has format -9 (Lucene 2.9).
> So that's not the matter, I guess...still ideas?! ;)
>
> Am 20.04.2011 10:17, schrieb Erik Fäßler:
>>
>> Thank you very much for your answers :-) First of all, I just noticed I
>> sent the question unintentionally to the Lucene list while it's more of a
>> Solr issue. I will answer here all the same to not confuse things. My
>> apologies ;)
>>
>> First to Erick's suggestions. The default field has been "text" for a
>> longer time so I did not make a change to that field yesterday but it had
>> been this field before already.
>> With "not created by Solr" I exactly mean it has been created using Lucene
>> directly. This could be an issue indeed as Lucene 2.3.1 has been used to
>> create the index, where Solr 1.4.1 uses Lucene 2.9.3. But it seemed to work
>> fine so far (but perhaps that's just wrong, I don't know yet).
>>
>> I tried your hint with appending "&debugQuery=on". Guess what: With that
>> appended I get my hits. No kidding, appending the debug option gives my 30
>> document hits, deleting it from my browser's address bar leaves me behind
>> with 0 hits (?!).
>> Adress bar strings are:
>> No hits:
>>
>> http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=marine&version=2.2&start=0&rows=10&indent=on
>> 30 hits:
>>
>> http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=marine&version=2.2&start=0&rows=10&indent=on&debugQuery=on
>>
>> Here's the debug output concerning the query:
>>
>> <str name="rawquerystring">marine</str>
>> <str name="querystring">marine</str>
>> <str name="parsedquery">text:marine</str>
>> <str name="parsedquery_toString">text:marine</str>
>>
>> Seems fine. This is expected because I already tried the analysis
>> interface to check whether the correct terms are searched for.
>> Here my schema snippets:
>>
>> FieldType "text_ws":
>> <fieldType name="text_ws" class="solr.TextField"
>> positionIncrementGap="100">
>> <analyzer>
>> <tokenizer class="solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory"/>
>> </analyzer>
>> </fieldType>
>> (Solr 1.4.1. default)
>>
>> Field "text":
>> <field name="text" type="text_ws" indexed="true" stored="true"
>> termVectors="true" termPositions="true" />
>>
>> Default search field:
>> <defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField>
>>
>> I guess this also answers the hints given by Lance. Writing this down, I
>> get the feeling the first thing I should do is to update my index to match
>> the Lucene version used by Solr. This seems to be the most obvious hint (but
>> as Luke can handle all version I thought using this index with Solr should
>> be fine, too). Although it's really quite strange that appending the debug
>> option changes my search results. Oh my, probably I did just miss some basic
>> about how to usr Solr ;)
>> Your opinion? Changing the index to another Lucene version isn't exactly
>> the fastest and easiest thing so I'd like to strike out all other
>> possibilities before :)
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Erik
>>
>>
>> Am 20.04.2011 01:07, schrieb Lance Norskog:
>>>
>>> Look at the "text" definition stack. Does it have the same analyzer
>>> and filter that you used to make the index, and in the same order?
>>>
>>> The specific problem is that the "text" field includes a stemmer, and
>>> your code probably did not. And so "marine" is stored as, maybe
>>> 'marin'. To check this out, look at the 'schema browser' page off the
>>> admin page. This will show you all of the indexed terms in each field.
>>> Also look at the Analysis page: this lets you see how text is parsed
>>> and changed in the analysis stack.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Erick Erickson<er...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hmmmm, I don't see the problem either. It *sounds* like you don't really
>>>> have the default search field defined the way you think you do. Did you
>>>> restart
>>>> Solr after making that change?
>>>>
>>>> I'm assuming that when you say "not created by Solr" you mean that it's
>>>> created
>>>> by Lucene. What version of Lucene and Solr are you using if that's true?
>>>>
>>>> You can test this by appending "&debugQuery=on" to your query or
>>>> checking
>>>> the "debug enable" checkbox in the full query interface from the admin
>>>> page.
>>>> That should show you exactly what is being searched. You might also want
>>>> to look at the analysis page for your field and see how your query
>>>> is tokenized.
>>>>
>>>> But, like I said, this looks like it should work. If you can post the
>>>> results of
>>>> adding&debugQuery=on and your actual<fieldType> definition for
>>>> "text_ws" your
>>>> <field> declaration for "text" and the<defaultSearchField> from your
>>>> schema
>>>> that would help. I can't tell you how many times something that's eluded
>>>> me
>>>> for hours is obvious to someone else :)..
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>> Erick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Erik Fäßler<er...@uni-jena.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hallo there,
>>>>>
>>>>> my issue qualifies as newbie question I guess, but I'm really a bit
>>>>> confused. I have an index which has not been created by Solr. Perhaps
>>>>> that's
>>>>> already the point although I fail to see why this should be an issue
>>>>> with my
>>>>> problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> I use the admin interface to check which results particular queries
>>>>> bring
>>>>> in. My index documents have a field "text" which holds the document
>>>>> text.
>>>>> This text has only been white space tokenized. So in my schema, the
>>>>> type for
>>>>> this field is "text_ws". My schema says
>>>>> "<defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField>".
>>>>>
>>>>> When I now search for, say, 'marine' (without quotes), I don't get any
>>>>> search results. But when I search '"marine"' (that is, embraced by
>>>>> double
>>>>> quotes) I get my document hits. Alternatively, I can prepend the field
>>>>> name:
>>>>> 'text:marine' and will also get my results.
>>>>>
>>>>> Similar with this phrase query: "marine mussels", where "In marine
>>>>> mussels
>>>>> of the genus" is a text snippet of a document. The phrase "marine
>>>>> mussels"
>>>>> won't give any hits. Searching for 'text:"marine mussels"' will give me
>>>>> the
>>>>> exact document containing this text snippet.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm sure this has quite a simple explanation but I'm unable to find it
>>>>> right
>>>>> now ;-) Perhaps you can help with that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks a lot!
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Erik
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Solr 1.4.1: Weird query results
Posted by Erik Fäßler <er...@uni-jena.de>.
Oooops, I have to take something back: The index *has* been created
with Lucene 2.9.3! Sorry for confusing that, I am using two different
index versions, the older for productive purposes and the newer for what
I am developing currently. I just checked back with Luke, he
acknowledges that the index used with my Solr instance has format -9
(Lucene 2.9).
So that's not the matter, I guess...still ideas?! ;)
Am 20.04.2011 10:17, schrieb Erik Fäßler:
> Thank you very much for your answers :-) First of all, I just noticed
> I sent the question unintentionally to the Lucene list while it's more
> of a Solr issue. I will answer here all the same to not confuse
> things. My apologies ;)
>
> First to Erick's suggestions. The default field has been "text" for a
> longer time so I did not make a change to that field yesterday but it
> had been this field before already.
> With "not created by Solr" I exactly mean it has been created using
> Lucene directly. This could be an issue indeed as Lucene 2.3.1 has
> been used to create the index, where Solr 1.4.1 uses Lucene 2.9.3. But
> it seemed to work fine so far (but perhaps that's just wrong, I don't
> know yet).
>
> I tried your hint with appending "&debugQuery=on". Guess what: With
> that appended I get my hits. No kidding, appending the debug option
> gives my 30 document hits, deleting it from my browser's address bar
> leaves me behind with 0 hits (?!).
> Adress bar strings are:
> No hits:
> http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=marine&version=2.2&start=0&rows=10&indent=on
>
> 30 hits:
> http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=marine&version=2.2&start=0&rows=10&indent=on&debugQuery=on
>
>
> Here's the debug output concerning the query:
>
> <str name="rawquerystring">marine</str>
> <str name="querystring">marine</str>
> <str name="parsedquery">text:marine</str>
> <str name="parsedquery_toString">text:marine</str>
>
> Seems fine. This is expected because I already tried the analysis
> interface to check whether the correct terms are searched for.
> Here my schema snippets:
>
> FieldType "text_ws":
> <fieldType name="text_ws" class="solr.TextField"
> positionIncrementGap="100">
> <analyzer>
> <tokenizer class="solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory"/>
> </analyzer>
> </fieldType>
> (Solr 1.4.1. default)
>
> Field "text":
> <field name="text" type="text_ws" indexed="true" stored="true"
> termVectors="true" termPositions="true" />
>
> Default search field:
> <defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField>
>
> I guess this also answers the hints given by Lance. Writing this down,
> I get the feeling the first thing I should do is to update my index to
> match the Lucene version used by Solr. This seems to be the most
> obvious hint (but as Luke can handle all version I thought using this
> index with Solr should be fine, too). Although it's really quite
> strange that appending the debug option changes my search results. Oh
> my, probably I did just miss some basic about how to usr Solr ;)
> Your opinion? Changing the index to another Lucene version isn't
> exactly the fastest and easiest thing so I'd like to strike out all
> other possibilities before :)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Erik
>
>
> Am 20.04.2011 01:07, schrieb Lance Norskog:
>> Look at the "text" definition stack. Does it have the same analyzer
>> and filter that you used to make the index, and in the same order?
>>
>> The specific problem is that the "text" field includes a stemmer, and
>> your code probably did not. And so "marine" is stored as, maybe
>> 'marin'. To check this out, look at the 'schema browser' page off the
>> admin page. This will show you all of the indexed terms in each field.
>> Also look at the Analysis page: this lets you see how text is parsed
>> and changed in the analysis stack.
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Erick
>> Erickson<er...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hmmmm, I don't see the problem either. It *sounds* like you don't
>>> really
>>> have the default search field defined the way you think you do. Did
>>> you restart
>>> Solr after making that change?
>>>
>>> I'm assuming that when you say "not created by Solr" you mean that
>>> it's created
>>> by Lucene. What version of Lucene and Solr are you using if that's
>>> true?
>>>
>>> You can test this by appending "&debugQuery=on" to your query or
>>> checking
>>> the "debug enable" checkbox in the full query interface from the
>>> admin page.
>>> That should show you exactly what is being searched. You might also
>>> want
>>> to look at the analysis page for your field and see how your query
>>> is tokenized.
>>>
>>> But, like I said, this looks like it should work. If you can post
>>> the results of
>>> adding&debugQuery=on and your actual<fieldType> definition for
>>> "text_ws" your
>>> <field> declaration for "text" and the<defaultSearchField> from
>>> your schema
>>> that would help. I can't tell you how many times something that's
>>> eluded me
>>> for hours is obvious to someone else :)..
>>>
>>> Best
>>> Erick
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Erik
>>> Fäßler<er...@uni-jena.de> wrote:
>>>> Hallo there,
>>>>
>>>> my issue qualifies as newbie question I guess, but I'm really a bit
>>>> confused. I have an index which has not been created by Solr.
>>>> Perhaps that's
>>>> already the point although I fail to see why this should be an
>>>> issue with my
>>>> problem.
>>>>
>>>> I use the admin interface to check which results particular queries
>>>> bring
>>>> in. My index documents have a field "text" which holds the document
>>>> text.
>>>> This text has only been white space tokenized. So in my schema, the
>>>> type for
>>>> this field is "text_ws". My schema says
>>>> "<defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField>".
>>>>
>>>> When I now search for, say, 'marine' (without quotes), I don't get any
>>>> search results. But when I search '"marine"' (that is, embraced by
>>>> double
>>>> quotes) I get my document hits. Alternatively, I can prepend the
>>>> field name:
>>>> 'text:marine' and will also get my results.
>>>>
>>>> Similar with this phrase query: "marine mussels", where "In marine
>>>> mussels
>>>> of the genus" is a text snippet of a document. The phrase "marine
>>>> mussels"
>>>> won't give any hits. Searching for 'text:"marine mussels"' will
>>>> give me the
>>>> exact document containing this text snippet.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure this has quite a simple explanation but I'm unable to find
>>>> it right
>>>> now ;-) Perhaps you can help with that.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks a lot!
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Erik
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Solr 1.4.1: Weird query results
Posted by Erik Fäßler <er...@uni-jena.de>.
Thank you very much for your answers :-) First of all, I just noticed
I sent the question unintentionally to the Lucene list while it's more
of a Solr issue. I will answer here all the same to not confuse things.
My apologies ;)
First to Erick's suggestions. The default field has been "text" for a
longer time so I did not make a change to that field yesterday but it
had been this field before already.
With "not created by Solr" I exactly mean it has been created using
Lucene directly. This could be an issue indeed as Lucene 2.3.1 has been
used to create the index, where Solr 1.4.1 uses Lucene 2.9.3. But it
seemed to work fine so far (but perhaps that's just wrong, I don't know
yet).
I tried your hint with appending "&debugQuery=on". Guess what: With that
appended I get my hits. No kidding, appending the debug option gives my
30 document hits, deleting it from my browser's address bar leaves me
behind with 0 hits (?!).
Adress bar strings are:
No hits:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=marine&version=2.2&start=0&rows=10&indent=on
30 hits:
http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?q=marine&version=2.2&start=0&rows=10&indent=on&debugQuery=on
Here's the debug output concerning the query:
<str name="rawquerystring">marine</str>
<str name="querystring">marine</str>
<str name="parsedquery">text:marine</str>
<str name="parsedquery_toString">text:marine</str>
Seems fine. This is expected because I already tried the analysis
interface to check whether the correct terms are searched for.
Here my schema snippets:
FieldType "text_ws":
<fieldType name="text_ws" class="solr.TextField" positionIncrementGap="100">
<analyzer>
<tokenizer class="solr.WhitespaceTokenizerFactory"/>
</analyzer>
</fieldType>
(Solr 1.4.1. default)
Field "text":
<field name="text" type="text_ws" indexed="true" stored="true"
termVectors="true" termPositions="true" />
Default search field:
<defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField>
I guess this also answers the hints given by Lance. Writing this down, I
get the feeling the first thing I should do is to update my index to
match the Lucene version used by Solr. This seems to be the most obvious
hint (but as Luke can handle all version I thought using this index with
Solr should be fine, too). Although it's really quite strange that
appending the debug option changes my search results. Oh my, probably I
did just miss some basic about how to usr Solr ;)
Your opinion? Changing the index to another Lucene version isn't exactly
the fastest and easiest thing so I'd like to strike out all other
possibilities before :)
Best regards,
Erik
Am 20.04.2011 01:07, schrieb Lance Norskog:
> Look at the "text" definition stack. Does it have the same analyzer
> and filter that you used to make the index, and in the same order?
>
> The specific problem is that the "text" field includes a stemmer, and
> your code probably did not. And so "marine" is stored as, maybe
> 'marin'. To check this out, look at the 'schema browser' page off the
> admin page. This will show you all of the indexed terms in each field.
> Also look at the Analysis page: this lets you see how text is parsed
> and changed in the analysis stack.
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Erick Erickson<er...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hmmmm, I don't see the problem either. It *sounds* like you don't really
>> have the default search field defined the way you think you do. Did you restart
>> Solr after making that change?
>>
>> I'm assuming that when you say "not created by Solr" you mean that it's created
>> by Lucene. What version of Lucene and Solr are you using if that's true?
>>
>> You can test this by appending "&debugQuery=on" to your query or checking
>> the "debug enable" checkbox in the full query interface from the admin page.
>> That should show you exactly what is being searched. You might also want
>> to look at the analysis page for your field and see how your query
>> is tokenized.
>>
>> But, like I said, this looks like it should work. If you can post the results of
>> adding&debugQuery=on and your actual<fieldType> definition for "text_ws" your
>> <field> declaration for "text" and the<defaultSearchField> from your schema
>> that would help. I can't tell you how many times something that's eluded me
>> for hours is obvious to someone else :)..
>>
>> Best
>> Erick
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Erik Fäßler<er...@uni-jena.de> wrote:
>>> Hallo there,
>>>
>>> my issue qualifies as newbie question I guess, but I'm really a bit
>>> confused. I have an index which has not been created by Solr. Perhaps that's
>>> already the point although I fail to see why this should be an issue with my
>>> problem.
>>>
>>> I use the admin interface to check which results particular queries bring
>>> in. My index documents have a field "text" which holds the document text.
>>> This text has only been white space tokenized. So in my schema, the type for
>>> this field is "text_ws". My schema says
>>> "<defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField>".
>>>
>>> When I now search for, say, 'marine' (without quotes), I don't get any
>>> search results. But when I search '"marine"' (that is, embraced by double
>>> quotes) I get my document hits. Alternatively, I can prepend the field name:
>>> 'text:marine' and will also get my results.
>>>
>>> Similar with this phrase query: "marine mussels", where "In marine mussels
>>> of the genus" is a text snippet of a document. The phrase "marine mussels"
>>> won't give any hits. Searching for 'text:"marine mussels"' will give me the
>>> exact document containing this text snippet.
>>>
>>> I'm sure this has quite a simple explanation but I'm unable to find it right
>>> now ;-) Perhaps you can help with that.
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot!
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Erik
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Solr 1.4.1: Weird query results
Posted by Lance Norskog <go...@gmail.com>.
Look at the "text" definition stack. Does it have the same analyzer
and filter that you used to make the index, and in the same order?
The specific problem is that the "text" field includes a stemmer, and
your code probably did not. And so "marine" is stored as, maybe
'marin'. To check this out, look at the 'schema browser' page off the
admin page. This will show you all of the indexed terms in each field.
Also look at the Analysis page: this lets you see how text is parsed
and changed in the analysis stack.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmmmm, I don't see the problem either. It *sounds* like you don't really
> have the default search field defined the way you think you do. Did you restart
> Solr after making that change?
>
> I'm assuming that when you say "not created by Solr" you mean that it's created
> by Lucene. What version of Lucene and Solr are you using if that's true?
>
> You can test this by appending "&debugQuery=on" to your query or checking
> the "debug enable" checkbox in the full query interface from the admin page.
> That should show you exactly what is being searched. You might also want
> to look at the analysis page for your field and see how your query
> is tokenized.
>
> But, like I said, this looks like it should work. If you can post the results of
> adding &debugQuery=on and your actual <fieldType> definition for "text_ws" your
> <field> declaration for "text" and the <defaultSearchField> from your schema
> that would help. I can't tell you how many times something that's eluded me
> for hours is obvious to someone else :)..
>
> Best
> Erick
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Erik Fäßler <er...@uni-jena.de> wrote:
>> Hallo there,
>>
>> my issue qualifies as newbie question I guess, but I'm really a bit
>> confused. I have an index which has not been created by Solr. Perhaps that's
>> already the point although I fail to see why this should be an issue with my
>> problem.
>>
>> I use the admin interface to check which results particular queries bring
>> in. My index documents have a field "text" which holds the document text.
>> This text has only been white space tokenized. So in my schema, the type for
>> this field is "text_ws". My schema says
>> "<defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField>".
>>
>> When I now search for, say, 'marine' (without quotes), I don't get any
>> search results. But when I search '"marine"' (that is, embraced by double
>> quotes) I get my document hits. Alternatively, I can prepend the field name:
>> 'text:marine' and will also get my results.
>>
>> Similar with this phrase query: "marine mussels", where "In marine mussels
>> of the genus" is a text snippet of a document. The phrase "marine mussels"
>> won't give any hits. Searching for 'text:"marine mussels"' will give me the
>> exact document containing this text snippet.
>>
>> I'm sure this has quite a simple explanation but I'm unable to find it right
>> now ;-) Perhaps you can help with that.
>>
>> Thanks a lot!
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Erik
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
--
Lance Norskog
goksron@gmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Solr 1.4.1: Weird query results
Posted by Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>.
Hmmmm, I don't see the problem either. It *sounds* like you don't really
have the default search field defined the way you think you do. Did you restart
Solr after making that change?
I'm assuming that when you say "not created by Solr" you mean that it's created
by Lucene. What version of Lucene and Solr are you using if that's true?
You can test this by appending "&debugQuery=on" to your query or checking
the "debug enable" checkbox in the full query interface from the admin page.
That should show you exactly what is being searched. You might also want
to look at the analysis page for your field and see how your query
is tokenized.
But, like I said, this looks like it should work. If you can post the results of
adding &debugQuery=on and your actual <fieldType> definition for "text_ws" your
<field> declaration for "text" and the <defaultSearchField> from your schema
that would help. I can't tell you how many times something that's eluded me
for hours is obvious to someone else :)..
Best
Erick
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Erik Fäßler <er...@uni-jena.de> wrote:
> Hallo there,
>
> my issue qualifies as newbie question I guess, but I'm really a bit
> confused. I have an index which has not been created by Solr. Perhaps that's
> already the point although I fail to see why this should be an issue with my
> problem.
>
> I use the admin interface to check which results particular queries bring
> in. My index documents have a field "text" which holds the document text.
> This text has only been white space tokenized. So in my schema, the type for
> this field is "text_ws". My schema says
> "<defaultSearchField>text</defaultSearchField>".
>
> When I now search for, say, 'marine' (without quotes), I don't get any
> search results. But when I search '"marine"' (that is, embraced by double
> quotes) I get my document hits. Alternatively, I can prepend the field name:
> 'text:marine' and will also get my results.
>
> Similar with this phrase query: "marine mussels", where "In marine mussels
> of the genus" is a text snippet of a document. The phrase "marine mussels"
> won't give any hits. Searching for 'text:"marine mussels"' will give me the
> exact document containing this text snippet.
>
> I'm sure this has quite a simple explanation but I'm unable to find it right
> now ;-) Perhaps you can help with that.
>
> Thanks a lot!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Erik
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org