You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to solr-user@lucene.apache.org by Darren Govoni <da...@ontrenet.com> on 2012/01/02 14:54:16 UTC
Highlighting in 3.5?
Hi,
Can someone tell me if this is correct behavior from Solr.
I search on a dynamic field:
field_t:[* TO *]
I set highlight fields to "field_t,text_t" but I am not searching
specifically inside text_t field.
The highlights for text_t come back with EVERY WORD. Maybe because of
the [* TO *], but
the query semantics indicate not searching on text_t even though
highlighting is enabled.
Is this correct behavior? it produces unwanted highlight results.
I would expect Solr to know what fields are participating in the query
and only highlight
those that are involved in the result set.
Thanks,
Darren
Re: Highlighting in 3.5?
Posted by da...@ontrenet.com.
I will. Thanks.
> Hi Darren,
>
> Would you please tell us all the parameters that you are sending in the
> request? You can use the parameter "echoParams=all" to get the list in the
> output.
>
> Thanks,
>
> *Juan*
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Darren Govoni <da...@ontrenet.com> wrote:
>
>> Forgot to add, that the time when I DO want the highlight to appear
>> would
>> be with a query that DOES match the default field.
>>
>> {!lucene q.op=OR df=text_t} kind_s:doc AND (( field_t:[* TO *] )) cars
>>
>> Where the term 'cars' would be matched against the df. Then I want the
>> highlight for it.
>>
>> If there are no query term matches for the df, then getting ALL the
>> field
>> terms highlighted (as it does now) is rather perplexing feature.
>>
>> Darren
>>
>>
>> On 01/02/2012 06:28 PM, Darren Govoni wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Juan,
>>> Setting that parameter produces the same extraneous results. Here is
>>> my
>>> query:
>>>
>>> {!lucene q.op=OR df=text_t} kind_s:doc AND (( field_t:[* TO *] ))
>>>
>>> Clearly, the default field (text_t) is not being searched by this query
>>> and highlighting it would be semantically incongruent with the query.
>>>
>>> Is it a bug?
>>>
>>> Darren
>>>
>>> On 01/02/2012 04:39 PM, Juan Grande wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Darren,
>>>>
>>>> This is the expected behavior. Have you tried setting the
>>>> hl.requireFieldMatch parameter to true? See:
>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/**HighlightingParameters#hl.**
>>>> requireFieldMatch<http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HighlightingParameters#hl.requireFieldMatch>
>>>>
>>>> *Juan*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Darren Govoni<da...@ontrenet.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>> Can someone tell me if this is correct behavior from Solr.
>>>>>
>>>>> I search on a dynamic field:
>>>>>
>>>>> field_t:[* TO *]
>>>>>
>>>>> I set highlight fields to "field_t,text_t" but I am not searching
>>>>> specifically inside text_t field.
>>>>>
>>>>> The highlights for text_t come back with EVERY WORD. Maybe because of
>>>>> the
>>>>> [* TO *], but
>>>>> the query semantics indicate not searching on text_t even though
>>>>> highlighting is enabled.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this correct behavior? it produces unwanted highlight results.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would expect Solr to know what fields are participating in the
>>>>> query
>>>>> and
>>>>> only highlight
>>>>> those that are involved in the result set.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Darren
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Highlighting in 3.5?
Posted by Juan Grande <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi Darren,
Would you please tell us all the parameters that you are sending in the
request? You can use the parameter "echoParams=all" to get the list in the
output.
Thanks,
*Juan*
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Darren Govoni <da...@ontrenet.com> wrote:
> Forgot to add, that the time when I DO want the highlight to appear would
> be with a query that DOES match the default field.
>
> {!lucene q.op=OR df=text_t} kind_s:doc AND (( field_t:[* TO *] )) cars
>
> Where the term 'cars' would be matched against the df. Then I want the
> highlight for it.
>
> If there are no query term matches for the df, then getting ALL the field
> terms highlighted (as it does now) is rather perplexing feature.
>
> Darren
>
>
> On 01/02/2012 06:28 PM, Darren Govoni wrote:
>
>> Hi Juan,
>> Setting that parameter produces the same extraneous results. Here is my
>> query:
>>
>> {!lucene q.op=OR df=text_t} kind_s:doc AND (( field_t:[* TO *] ))
>>
>> Clearly, the default field (text_t) is not being searched by this query
>> and highlighting it would be semantically incongruent with the query.
>>
>> Is it a bug?
>>
>> Darren
>>
>> On 01/02/2012 04:39 PM, Juan Grande wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Darren,
>>>
>>> This is the expected behavior. Have you tried setting the
>>> hl.requireFieldMatch parameter to true? See:
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/**HighlightingParameters#hl.**
>>> requireFieldMatch<http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HighlightingParameters#hl.requireFieldMatch>
>>>
>>> *Juan*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Darren Govoni<da...@ontrenet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>> Can someone tell me if this is correct behavior from Solr.
>>>>
>>>> I search on a dynamic field:
>>>>
>>>> field_t:[* TO *]
>>>>
>>>> I set highlight fields to "field_t,text_t" but I am not searching
>>>> specifically inside text_t field.
>>>>
>>>> The highlights for text_t come back with EVERY WORD. Maybe because of
>>>> the
>>>> [* TO *], but
>>>> the query semantics indicate not searching on text_t even though
>>>> highlighting is enabled.
>>>>
>>>> Is this correct behavior? it produces unwanted highlight results.
>>>>
>>>> I would expect Solr to know what fields are participating in the query
>>>> and
>>>> only highlight
>>>> those that are involved in the result set.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Darren
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Re: Highlighting in 3.5?
Posted by Darren Govoni <da...@ontrenet.com>.
Forgot to add, that the time when I DO want the highlight to appear
would be with a query that DOES match the default field.
{!lucene q.op=OR df=text_t} kind_s:doc AND (( field_t:[* TO *] )) cars
Where the term 'cars' would be matched against the df. Then I want the
highlight for it.
If there are no query term matches for the df, then getting ALL the
field terms highlighted (as it does now) is rather perplexing feature.
Darren
On 01/02/2012 06:28 PM, Darren Govoni wrote:
> Hi Juan,
> Setting that parameter produces the same extraneous results. Here is
> my query:
>
> {!lucene q.op=OR df=text_t} kind_s:doc AND (( field_t:[* TO *] ))
>
> Clearly, the default field (text_t) is not being searched by this
> query and highlighting it would be semantically incongruent with the
> query.
>
> Is it a bug?
>
> Darren
>
> On 01/02/2012 04:39 PM, Juan Grande wrote:
>> Hi Darren,
>>
>> This is the expected behavior. Have you tried setting the
>> hl.requireFieldMatch parameter to true? See:
>> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HighlightingParameters#hl.requireFieldMatch
>>
>> *Juan*
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Darren Govoni<da...@ontrenet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> Can someone tell me if this is correct behavior from Solr.
>>>
>>> I search on a dynamic field:
>>>
>>> field_t:[* TO *]
>>>
>>> I set highlight fields to "field_t,text_t" but I am not searching
>>> specifically inside text_t field.
>>>
>>> The highlights for text_t come back with EVERY WORD. Maybe because
>>> of the
>>> [* TO *], but
>>> the query semantics indicate not searching on text_t even though
>>> highlighting is enabled.
>>>
>>> Is this correct behavior? it produces unwanted highlight results.
>>>
>>> I would expect Solr to know what fields are participating in the
>>> query and
>>> only highlight
>>> those that are involved in the result set.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Darren
>>>
>
Re: Highlighting in 3.5?
Posted by Darren Govoni <da...@ontrenet.com>.
Hi Juan,
Setting that parameter produces the same extraneous results. Here is
my query:
{!lucene q.op=OR df=text_t} kind_s:doc AND (( field_t:[* TO *] ))
Clearly, the default field (text_t) is not being searched by this query
and highlighting it would be semantically incongruent with the query.
Is it a bug?
Darren
On 01/02/2012 04:39 PM, Juan Grande wrote:
> Hi Darren,
>
> This is the expected behavior. Have you tried setting the
> hl.requireFieldMatch parameter to true? See:
> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HighlightingParameters#hl.requireFieldMatch
>
> *Juan*
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Darren Govoni<da...@ontrenet.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> Can someone tell me if this is correct behavior from Solr.
>>
>> I search on a dynamic field:
>>
>> field_t:[* TO *]
>>
>> I set highlight fields to "field_t,text_t" but I am not searching
>> specifically inside text_t field.
>>
>> The highlights for text_t come back with EVERY WORD. Maybe because of the
>> [* TO *], but
>> the query semantics indicate not searching on text_t even though
>> highlighting is enabled.
>>
>> Is this correct behavior? it produces unwanted highlight results.
>>
>> I would expect Solr to know what fields are participating in the query and
>> only highlight
>> those that are involved in the result set.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Darren
>>
Re: Highlighting in 3.5?
Posted by Juan Grande <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi Darren,
This is the expected behavior. Have you tried setting the
hl.requireFieldMatch parameter to true? See:
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/HighlightingParameters#hl.requireFieldMatch
*Juan*
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Darren Govoni <da...@ontrenet.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Can someone tell me if this is correct behavior from Solr.
>
> I search on a dynamic field:
>
> field_t:[* TO *]
>
> I set highlight fields to "field_t,text_t" but I am not searching
> specifically inside text_t field.
>
> The highlights for text_t come back with EVERY WORD. Maybe because of the
> [* TO *], but
> the query semantics indicate not searching on text_t even though
> highlighting is enabled.
>
> Is this correct behavior? it produces unwanted highlight results.
>
> I would expect Solr to know what fields are participating in the query and
> only highlight
> those that are involved in the result set.
>
> Thanks,
> Darren
>