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 elisabeth benoit <el...@gmail.com> on 2011/05/02 08:43:55 UTC
Re: fq parameter with partial value
I'm a bit confused here.
What is the difference between CATEGORY and CATEGORY_TOKENIZED if I just do
a copyField from what field to another? And how can I search only for
Restaurant (fq= CATEGORY_TOKENIZED: Restaurant). Shouldn't I have something
like
<field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Hotel</field>, if I want this to work. And
from what I understand, this means I should do more then just copy
<field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
to CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
Thanks,
Elisabeth
2011/4/28 Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>
> See below:
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:03 AM, elisabeth benoit
> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > yes, the multivalued field is not broken up into tokens.
> >
> > so, if I understand well what you mean, I could have
> >
> > a field CATEGORY with multiValued="true"
> > a field CATEGORY_TOKENIZED with multiValued=" true"
> >
> > and then some POI
> >
> > <field name="NAME">POI_Name</field>
> > ...
> > <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
> > <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Restaurant</field>
> > <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Hotel</field>
>
> [EOE] If the above is the document you're sending, then no. The
> document would be indexed with
> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>
>
> Or even just:
> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>
> and set up a <copyField> to copy the value from CATEGORY to
> CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
>
> The multiValued part comes from:
> "And a single POIs might have different categories so your document could
> have"
> which would look like:
> <field name="CATEGORY">Restaruant Hotel</field>
> <field name="CATEGORY">Health Spa</field>
> <field name="CATEGORY">Dance Hall</field>
>
> and your document would be counted for each of those entries while searches
> against CATEGORY_TOKENIZED would match things like "dance" "spa" etc.
>
> But do notice that if you did NOT want searching for "restaurant hall"
> (no quotes),
> to match then you could do proximity searches for less than your
> increment gap. e.g.
> (this time with the quotes) would be "restaurant hall"~50, which would then
> NOT match if your increment gap were 100.
>
> Best
> Erick
>
>
> >
> > do faceting on CATEGORY and fq on CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
> >
> > But then, wouldn't it be possible to do faceting on CATEGORY_TOKENIZED?
> >
> > Best regards
> > Elisabeth
> >
> >
> > 2011/4/28 Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>
> >
> >> So, I assume your CATEGORY field is multiValued but each value is not
> >> broken up into tokens, right? If that's the case, would it work to have
> a
> >> second field CATEGORY_TOKENIZED and run your fq against that
> >> field instead?
> >>
> >> You could have this be a multiValued field with an increment gap if you
> >> wanted
> >> to prevent matches across separate entries and have your fq do a
> proximity
> >> search where the proximity was less than the increment gap....
> >>
> >> Best
> >> Erick
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:03 AM, elisabeth benoit
> >> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi Stefan,
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for answering.
> >> >
> >> > In more details, my problem is the following. I'm working on searching
> >> > points of interest (POIs), which can be hotels, restaurants, plumbers,
> >> > psychologists, etc.
> >> >
> >> > Those POIs can be identified among other things by categories or by
> >> brand.
> >> > And a single POIs might have different categories (no maximum number).
> >> User
> >> > might enter a query like
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > McDonald’s Paris
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > or
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Restaurant Paris
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > or
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > many other possible queries
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > First I want to do a facet search on brand and categories, to find out
> >> which
> >> > case is the current case.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > http://localhost:8080/solr /select?q=restaurant paris
> >> > &facet=true&facet.field=BRAND& facet.field=CATEGORY
> >> >
> >> > and get an answer like
> >> >
> >> > <lst name="facet_fields">
> >> >
> >> > <lst name="CATEGORY">
> >> >
> >> > <int name="Restaurant">598</int>
> >> >
> >> > <int name="Restaurant Hotel">451</int>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Then I want to send a request with fq= CATEGORY: Restaurant and still
> get
> >> > answers with CATEGORY= Restaurant Hotel.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > One solution would be to modify the data to add a new document every
> time
> >> we
> >> > have a new category, so a POI with three different categories would be
> >> index
> >> > three times, each time with a different category.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > But I was wondering if there was another way around.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Thanks again,
> >> >
> >> > Elisabeth
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 2011/4/28 Stefan Matheis <ma...@googlemail.com>
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Elisabeth,
> >> >>
> >> >> that's not what FilterQueries are made for :) What against using that
> >> >> Criteria in the Query?
> >> >> Perhaps you want to describe your UseCase and we'll see if there's
> >> >> another way to solve it?
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards
> >> >> Stefan
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:09 AM, elisabeth benoit
> >> >> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I would like to know if there is a way to use the fq parameter with
> a
> >> >> > partial value.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > For instance, if I have a request with fq=NAME:Joe, and I would
> like
> >> to
> >> >> > retrieve all answers where NAME contains Joe, including those with
> >> NAME =
> >> >> > Joe Smith.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thanks,
> >> >> > Elisabeth
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
Re: fq parameter with partial value
Posted by Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>.
See more below :).
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 2:43 AM, elisabeth benoit
<el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm a bit confused here.
>
> What is the difference between CATEGORY and CATEGORY_TOKENIZED if I just do
> a copyField from what field to another?
[EOE] Copyfield is done with the original data, not the processed
data. So it's as though
you added both fields in the input document.
And how can I search only for
> Restaurant (fq= CATEGORY_TOKENIZED: Restaurant). Shouldn't I have something
> like
> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Hotel</field>, if I want this to work.
[EOE] that's what copyfield does for you.
And
> from what I understand, this means I should do more then just copy
> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
> to CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
>
[EOE] Don't understand your question.
Here's what I'd suggest. Just try it. Then use the admin page to look at
your fields to see what the indexed values are. Also, try using
the admin page to run some test queries with debugging on, I always get
more out of a few experiments than I do out of documentation...
Best
Erick
> Thanks,
> Elisabeth
>
>
> 2011/4/28 Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>
>
>> See below:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:03 AM, elisabeth benoit
>> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > yes, the multivalued field is not broken up into tokens.
>> >
>> > so, if I understand well what you mean, I could have
>> >
>> > a field CATEGORY with multiValued="true"
>> > a field CATEGORY_TOKENIZED with multiValued=" true"
>> >
>> > and then some POI
>> >
>> > <field name="NAME">POI_Name</field>
>> > ...
>> > <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>> > <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Restaurant</field>
>> > <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Hotel</field>
>>
>> [EOE] If the above is the document you're sending, then no. The
>> document would be indexed with
>> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>>
>>
>> Or even just:
>> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>>
>> and set up a <copyField> to copy the value from CATEGORY to
>> CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
>>
>> The multiValued part comes from:
>> "And a single POIs might have different categories so your document could
>> have"
>> which would look like:
>> <field name="CATEGORY">Restaruant Hotel</field>
>> <field name="CATEGORY">Health Spa</field>
>> <field name="CATEGORY">Dance Hall</field>
>>
>> and your document would be counted for each of those entries while searches
>> against CATEGORY_TOKENIZED would match things like "dance" "spa" etc.
>>
>> But do notice that if you did NOT want searching for "restaurant hall"
>> (no quotes),
>> to match then you could do proximity searches for less than your
>> increment gap. e.g.
>> (this time with the quotes) would be "restaurant hall"~50, which would then
>> NOT match if your increment gap were 100.
>>
>> Best
>> Erick
>>
>>
>> >
>> > do faceting on CATEGORY and fq on CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
>> >
>> > But then, wouldn't it be possible to do faceting on CATEGORY_TOKENIZED?
>> >
>> > Best regards
>> > Elisabeth
>> >
>> >
>> > 2011/4/28 Erick Erickson <er...@gmail.com>
>> >
>> >> So, I assume your CATEGORY field is multiValued but each value is not
>> >> broken up into tokens, right? If that's the case, would it work to have
>> a
>> >> second field CATEGORY_TOKENIZED and run your fq against that
>> >> field instead?
>> >>
>> >> You could have this be a multiValued field with an increment gap if you
>> >> wanted
>> >> to prevent matches across separate entries and have your fq do a
>> proximity
>> >> search where the proximity was less than the increment gap....
>> >>
>> >> Best
>> >> Erick
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:03 AM, elisabeth benoit
>> >> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > Hi Stefan,
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks for answering.
>> >> >
>> >> > In more details, my problem is the following. I'm working on searching
>> >> > points of interest (POIs), which can be hotels, restaurants, plumbers,
>> >> > psychologists, etc.
>> >> >
>> >> > Those POIs can be identified among other things by categories or by
>> >> brand.
>> >> > And a single POIs might have different categories (no maximum number).
>> >> User
>> >> > might enter a query like
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > McDonald’s Paris
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > or
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Restaurant Paris
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > or
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > many other possible queries
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > First I want to do a facet search on brand and categories, to find out
>> >> which
>> >> > case is the current case.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > http://localhost:8080/solr /select?q=restaurant paris
>> >> > &facet=true&facet.field=BRAND& facet.field=CATEGORY
>> >> >
>> >> > and get an answer like
>> >> >
>> >> > <lst name="facet_fields">
>> >> >
>> >> > <lst name="CATEGORY">
>> >> >
>> >> > <int name="Restaurant">598</int>
>> >> >
>> >> > <int name="Restaurant Hotel">451</int>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Then I want to send a request with fq= CATEGORY: Restaurant and still
>> get
>> >> > answers with CATEGORY= Restaurant Hotel.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > One solution would be to modify the data to add a new document every
>> time
>> >> we
>> >> > have a new category, so a POI with three different categories would be
>> >> index
>> >> > three times, each time with a different category.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > But I was wondering if there was another way around.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks again,
>> >> >
>> >> > Elisabeth
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > 2011/4/28 Stefan Matheis <ma...@googlemail.com>
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hi Elisabeth,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> that's not what FilterQueries are made for :) What against using that
>> >> >> Criteria in the Query?
>> >> >> Perhaps you want to describe your UseCase and we'll see if there's
>> >> >> another way to solve it?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Regards
>> >> >> Stefan
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:09 AM, elisabeth benoit
>> >> >> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > Hello,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I would like to know if there is a way to use the fq parameter with
>> a
>> >> >> > partial value.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > For instance, if I have a request with fq=NAME:Joe, and I would
>> like
>> >> to
>> >> >> > retrieve all answers where NAME contains Joe, including those with
>> >> NAME =
>> >> >> > Joe Smith.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Thanks,
>> >> >> > Elisabeth
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
Re: fq parameter with partial value
Posted by elisabeth benoit <el...@gmail.com>.
Ok, thanks a lot.
After making a few tests, I finally understood what you meant.
Best regards,
Elisabeth
2011/5/2 Jonathan Rochkind <ro...@jhu.edu>
> So if you have a field that IS tokenized, regardless of what it's called,
> then when you send "My Great Restaurant" to it for _indexing_, it gets
> _tokenized upon indexing_ to seperate tokens: "My", "Great", "Restaurant".
> Depending on what other analysis you have, it may get further analyzed,
> perhaps to: "my", "great", "restaurant".
>
> You don't need to seperate into tokens yourself before sending it to Solr
> for indexing, if you define the field using a tokenizer, Solr will do that
> when you index. Because this is a VERY common thing to do with Solr; pretty
> much any field that you want to be effectively searchable you have Solr
> tokenize like this.
>
> Because Solr pretty much always matches on individual tokens, that's the
> fundamental way Solr works.
> Those seperate tokens is what allows you to SEARCH on the field, and get a
> match on "my" or on "restaurant". If the field were non-tokenized, you'd
> ONLY get a hit if the user entered "My Great Restaurant" (and really not
> even then unless you take other actions, because of the way Solr query
> parsers work you'll have trouble getting ANY hits to a user-entered search
> with the 'lucene' or 'dismax' query parsers if you don't tokenize).
>
> That tokenized filed won't facet very well though -- if you facetted on a
> tokenized field with that example entered in it, you'll get a facet "my"
> with that item in it, and another facet "great" with that item in it, and
> another facet "restuarant" with that item in it.
>
> Which is why you likely want to use a seperate _untokenized_ field for
> facetting. Which is why you end up wanting/needing two seperate fields --
> one that is tokenized for searching, and one that is not tokenized (and
> usually not analyzed at all) for facetting.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
>
> On 5/2/2011 2:43 AM, elisabeth benoit wrote:
>
>> I'm a bit confused here.
>>
>> What is the difference between CATEGORY and CATEGORY_TOKENIZED if I just
>> do
>> a copyField from what field to another? And how can I search only for
>> Restaurant (fq= CATEGORY_TOKENIZED: Restaurant). Shouldn't I have
>> something
>> like
>> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Hotel</field>, if I want this to work.
>> And
>> from what I understand, this means I should do more then just copy
>> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>> to CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Elisabeth
>>
>>
>> 2011/4/28 Erick Erickson<er...@gmail.com>
>>
>> See below:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:03 AM, elisabeth benoit
>>> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> yes, the multivalued field is not broken up into tokens.
>>>>
>>>> so, if I understand well what you mean, I could have
>>>>
>>>> a field CATEGORY with multiValued="true"
>>>> a field CATEGORY_TOKENIZED with multiValued=" true"
>>>>
>>>> and then some POI
>>>>
>>>> <field name="NAME">POI_Name</field>
>>>> ...
>>>> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>>>> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Restaurant</field>
>>>> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Hotel</field>
>>>>
>>> [EOE] If the above is the document you're sending, then no. The
>>> document would be indexed with
>>> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>>> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>>>
>>>
>>> Or even just:
>>> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>>>
>>> and set up a<copyField> to copy the value from CATEGORY to
>>> CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
>>>
>>> The multiValued part comes from:
>>> "And a single POIs might have different categories so your document could
>>> have"
>>> which would look like:
>>> <field name="CATEGORY">Restaruant Hotel</field>
>>> <field name="CATEGORY">Health Spa</field>
>>> <field name="CATEGORY">Dance Hall</field>
>>>
>>> and your document would be counted for each of those entries while
>>> searches
>>> against CATEGORY_TOKENIZED would match things like "dance" "spa" etc.
>>>
>>> But do notice that if you did NOT want searching for "restaurant hall"
>>> (no quotes),
>>> to match then you could do proximity searches for less than your
>>> increment gap. e.g.
>>> (this time with the quotes) would be "restaurant hall"~50, which would
>>> then
>>> NOT match if your increment gap were 100.
>>>
>>> Best
>>> Erick
>>>
>>>
>>> do faceting on CATEGORY and fq on CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
>>>>
>>>> But then, wouldn't it be possible to do faceting on CATEGORY_TOKENIZED?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Elisabeth
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2011/4/28 Erick Erickson<er...@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> So, I assume your CATEGORY field is multiValued but each value is not
>>>>> broken up into tokens, right? If that's the case, would it work to have
>>>>>
>>>> a
>>>
>>>> second field CATEGORY_TOKENIZED and run your fq against that
>>>>> field instead?
>>>>>
>>>>> You could have this be a multiValued field with an increment gap if you
>>>>> wanted
>>>>> to prevent matches across separate entries and have your fq do a
>>>>>
>>>> proximity
>>>
>>>> search where the proximity was less than the increment gap....
>>>>>
>>>>> Best
>>>>> Erick
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:03 AM, elisabeth benoit
>>>>> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Stefan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for answering.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In more details, my problem is the following. I'm working on searching
>>>>>> points of interest (POIs), which can be hotels, restaurants, plumbers,
>>>>>> psychologists, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those POIs can be identified among other things by categories or by
>>>>>>
>>>>> brand.
>>>>>
>>>>>> And a single POIs might have different categories (no maximum number).
>>>>>>
>>>>> User
>>>>>
>>>>>> might enter a query like
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> McDonald’s Paris
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Restaurant Paris
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> many other possible queries
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> First I want to do a facet search on brand and categories, to find out
>>>>>>
>>>>> which
>>>>>
>>>>>> case is the current case.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://localhost:8080/solr /select?q=restaurant paris
>>>>>> &facet=true&facet.field=BRAND& facet.field=CATEGORY
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and get an answer like
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <lst name="facet_fields">
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <lst name="CATEGORY">
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <int name="Restaurant">598</int>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <int name="Restaurant Hotel">451</int>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then I want to send a request with fq= CATEGORY: Restaurant and still
>>>>>>
>>>>> get
>>>
>>>> answers with CATEGORY= Restaurant Hotel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One solution would be to modify the data to add a new document every
>>>>>>
>>>>> time
>>>
>>>> we
>>>>>
>>>>>> have a new category, so a POI with three different categories would be
>>>>>>
>>>>> index
>>>>>
>>>>>> three times, each time with a different category.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But I was wondering if there was another way around.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks again,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Elisabeth
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2011/4/28 Stefan Matheis<ma...@googlemail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Elisabeth,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> that's not what FilterQueries are made for :) What against using that
>>>>>>> Criteria in the Query?
>>>>>>> Perhaps you want to describe your UseCase and we'll see if there's
>>>>>>> another way to solve it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> Stefan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:09 AM, elisabeth benoit
>>>>>>> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would like to know if there is a way to use the fq parameter with
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> a
>>>
>>>> partial value.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For instance, if I have a request with fq=NAME:Joe, and I would
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> like
>>>
>>>> to
>>>>>
>>>>>> retrieve all answers where NAME contains Joe, including those with
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> NAME =
>>>>>
>>>>>> Joe Smith.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Elisabeth
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
Re: fq parameter with partial value
Posted by Jonathan Rochkind <ro...@jhu.edu>.
So if you have a field that IS tokenized, regardless of what it's
called, then when you send "My Great Restaurant" to it for _indexing_,
it gets _tokenized upon indexing_ to seperate tokens: "My", "Great",
"Restaurant". Depending on what other analysis you have, it may get
further analyzed, perhaps to: "my", "great", "restaurant".
You don't need to seperate into tokens yourself before sending it to
Solr for indexing, if you define the field using a tokenizer, Solr will
do that when you index. Because this is a VERY common thing to do with
Solr; pretty much any field that you want to be effectively searchable
you have Solr tokenize like this.
Because Solr pretty much always matches on individual tokens, that's the
fundamental way Solr works.
Those seperate tokens is what allows you to SEARCH on the field, and get
a match on "my" or on "restaurant". If the field were non-tokenized,
you'd ONLY get a hit if the user entered "My Great Restaurant" (and
really not even then unless you take other actions, because of the way
Solr query parsers work you'll have trouble getting ANY hits to a
user-entered search with the 'lucene' or 'dismax' query parsers if you
don't tokenize).
That tokenized filed won't facet very well though -- if you facetted on
a tokenized field with that example entered in it, you'll get a facet
"my" with that item in it, and another facet "great" with that item in
it, and another facet "restuarant" with that item in it.
Which is why you likely want to use a seperate _untokenized_ field for
facetting. Which is why you end up wanting/needing two seperate fields
-- one that is tokenized for searching, and one that is not tokenized
(and usually not analyzed at all) for facetting.
Hope this helps.
On 5/2/2011 2:43 AM, elisabeth benoit wrote:
> I'm a bit confused here.
>
> What is the difference between CATEGORY and CATEGORY_TOKENIZED if I just do
> a copyField from what field to another? And how can I search only for
> Restaurant (fq= CATEGORY_TOKENIZED: Restaurant). Shouldn't I have something
> like
> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Hotel</field>, if I want this to work. And
> from what I understand, this means I should do more then just copy
> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
> to CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
>
> Thanks,
> Elisabeth
>
>
> 2011/4/28 Erick Erickson<er...@gmail.com>
>
>> See below:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:03 AM, elisabeth benoit
>> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> yes, the multivalued field is not broken up into tokens.
>>>
>>> so, if I understand well what you mean, I could have
>>>
>>> a field CATEGORY with multiValued="true"
>>> a field CATEGORY_TOKENIZED with multiValued=" true"
>>>
>>> and then some POI
>>>
>>> <field name="NAME">POI_Name</field>
>>> ...
>>> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>>> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Restaurant</field>
>>> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Hotel</field>
>> [EOE] If the above is the document you're sending, then no. The
>> document would be indexed with
>> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>> <field name="CATEGORY_TOKENIZED">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>>
>>
>> Or even just:
>> <field name="*CATEGORY*">Restaurant Hotel</field>
>>
>> and set up a<copyField> to copy the value from CATEGORY to
>> CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
>>
>> The multiValued part comes from:
>> "And a single POIs might have different categories so your document could
>> have"
>> which would look like:
>> <field name="CATEGORY">Restaruant Hotel</field>
>> <field name="CATEGORY">Health Spa</field>
>> <field name="CATEGORY">Dance Hall</field>
>>
>> and your document would be counted for each of those entries while searches
>> against CATEGORY_TOKENIZED would match things like "dance" "spa" etc.
>>
>> But do notice that if you did NOT want searching for "restaurant hall"
>> (no quotes),
>> to match then you could do proximity searches for less than your
>> increment gap. e.g.
>> (this time with the quotes) would be "restaurant hall"~50, which would then
>> NOT match if your increment gap were 100.
>>
>> Best
>> Erick
>>
>>
>>> do faceting on CATEGORY and fq on CATEGORY_TOKENIZED.
>>>
>>> But then, wouldn't it be possible to do faceting on CATEGORY_TOKENIZED?
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Elisabeth
>>>
>>>
>>> 2011/4/28 Erick Erickson<er...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> So, I assume your CATEGORY field is multiValued but each value is not
>>>> broken up into tokens, right? If that's the case, would it work to have
>> a
>>>> second field CATEGORY_TOKENIZED and run your fq against that
>>>> field instead?
>>>>
>>>> You could have this be a multiValued field with an increment gap if you
>>>> wanted
>>>> to prevent matches across separate entries and have your fq do a
>> proximity
>>>> search where the proximity was less than the increment gap....
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>> Erick
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:03 AM, elisabeth benoit
>>>> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Stefan,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for answering.
>>>>>
>>>>> In more details, my problem is the following. I'm working on searching
>>>>> points of interest (POIs), which can be hotels, restaurants, plumbers,
>>>>> psychologists, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Those POIs can be identified among other things by categories or by
>>>> brand.
>>>>> And a single POIs might have different categories (no maximum number).
>>>> User
>>>>> might enter a query like
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> McDonald’s Paris
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> or
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Restaurant Paris
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> or
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> many other possible queries
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> First I want to do a facet search on brand and categories, to find out
>>>> which
>>>>> case is the current case.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://localhost:8080/solr /select?q=restaurant paris
>>>>> &facet=true&facet.field=BRAND& facet.field=CATEGORY
>>>>>
>>>>> and get an answer like
>>>>>
>>>>> <lst name="facet_fields">
>>>>>
>>>>> <lst name="CATEGORY">
>>>>>
>>>>> <int name="Restaurant">598</int>
>>>>>
>>>>> <int name="Restaurant Hotel">451</int>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then I want to send a request with fq= CATEGORY: Restaurant and still
>> get
>>>>> answers with CATEGORY= Restaurant Hotel.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> One solution would be to modify the data to add a new document every
>> time
>>>> we
>>>>> have a new category, so a POI with three different categories would be
>>>> index
>>>>> three times, each time with a different category.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But I was wondering if there was another way around.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks again,
>>>>>
>>>>> Elisabeth
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2011/4/28 Stefan Matheis<ma...@googlemail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Elisabeth,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> that's not what FilterQueries are made for :) What against using that
>>>>>> Criteria in the Query?
>>>>>> Perhaps you want to describe your UseCase and we'll see if there's
>>>>>> another way to solve it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Stefan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:09 AM, elisabeth benoit
>>>>>> <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would like to know if there is a way to use the fq parameter with
>> a
>>>>>>> partial value.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For instance, if I have a request with fq=NAME:Joe, and I would
>> like
>>>> to
>>>>>>> retrieve all answers where NAME contains Joe, including those with
>>>> NAME =
>>>>>>> Joe Smith.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Elisabeth
>>>>>>>