boosting, both query time and other

[Dennis Gearon <ge...@sbcglobal.net>]

So, our main search results has some very common fields,

'title'
'tags'
'description'

What kind of boosting has everybody been using that makes them and their 
customers happy with these kind of fields?

What are the pros and cons of query time boosting versus configured boosting?

 Dennis Gearon


Signature Warning
----------------
It is always a good idea to learn from your own mistakes. It is usually a better 
idea to learn from others’ mistakes, so you do not have to make them yourself. 
from 'http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4501&tag=nl.e036'


EARTH has a Right To Life,
otherwise we all die.

Re: boosting, both query time and other

[Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>]

Basically that's unanswerable, you have to look at trying
various choices with your corpus. Take a look at the defaults
in the dismax request handler in the example schema for a
place to start... And do be aware that the "correct" values may
change as your corpus acquires more data.

I'm not sure what you're really asking when you say "query time
boosting versus configured boosting". Could you give an example?

Best
Erick

On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Dennis Gearon <ge...@sbcglobal.net>wrote:

> So, our main search results has some very common fields,
>
> 'title'
> 'tags'
> 'description'
>
> What kind of boosting has everybody been using that makes them and their
> customers happy with these kind of fields?
>
> What are the pros and cons of query time boosting versus configured
> boosting?
>
>  Dennis Gearon
>
>
> Signature Warning
> ----------------
> It is always a good idea to learn from your own mistakes. It is usually a
> better
> idea to learn from others’ mistakes, so you do not have to make them
> yourself.
> from 'http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=4501&tag=nl.e036'
>
>
> EARTH has a Right To Life,
> otherwise we all die.
>
>