[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2010?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12924391#action_12924391
]
Yonik Seeley edited comment on SOLR-2010 at 10/24/10 6:53 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------
bq. James, I did the merge back to 3.x.
FYI, you missed Robert's resource leak fixes to SpellCheckCollatorTest.
Not sure what best practice is to catch stuff like this... if it's only a file
or two, I guess check the history of each?
edit: actually your backport to 3x didn't even touch SpellCheckCollatorTest. I
was misled by the fact that when you look at the history of
SpellCheckCollatorTest, it shows an update. But I guess it was just merge
properties. Ugh.
{noformat}
yo...@wolverine /cygdrive/c/code/lusolr_3x
$ svn log ./solr/src/test/org/apache/solr/spelling/SpellCheckCollatorTest.java
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r1026000 | gsingers | 2010-10-21 09:48:34 -0400 (Thu, 21 Oct 2010) | 1 line
SOLR-2010, including Yonik's fix, SOLR-2181 -- hope I did this merge correctly
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r1021439 | gsingers | 2010-10-11 13:32:11 -0400 (Mon, 11 Oct 2010) | 1 line
SOLR-2010: added richer support for spell checking collations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
yo...@wolverine /cygdrive/c/code/lusolr_3x
$ svn diff -r 1021439:1026000
./solr/src/test/org/apache/solr/spelling/SpellCheckCollatorTest.java
yo...@wolverine /cygdrive/c/code/lusolr_3x
{noformat}
I'm in the process of getting branch_3x to pass the searcher open/close test,
so I'll handle this.
was (Author: [email protected]):
bq. James, I did the merge back to 3.x.
FYI, you missed Robert's resource leak fixes to SpellCheckCollatorTest.
Not sure what best practice is to catch stuff like this... if it's only a file
or two, I guess check the history of each?
I'm in the process of getting branch_3x to pass the searcher open/close test,
so I'll handle this.
> Improvements to SpellCheckComponent Collate functionality
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-2010
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-2010
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: clients - java, spellchecker
> Affects Versions: 1.4.1
> Environment: Tested against trunk revision 966633
> Reporter: James Dyer
> Assignee: Grant Ingersoll
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: multiple_collations_as_an_array.patch, SOLR-2010.patch,
> SOLR-2010.patch, SOLR-2010.patch, SOLR-2010.patch, SOLR-2010.txt,
> SOLR-2010_141.patch, SOLR-2010_141.patch,
> SOLR-2010_shardRecombineCollations_993538.patch,
> SOLR-2010_shardRecombineCollations_999521.patch,
> SOLR-2010_shardSearchHandler_993538.patch,
> SOLR-2010_shardSearchHandler_999521.patch, solr_2010_3x.patch
>
>
> Improvements to SpellCheckComponent Collate functionality
> Our project requires a better Spell Check Collator. I'm contributing this as
> a patch to get suggestions for improvements and in case there is a broader
> need for these features.
> 1. Only return collations that are guaranteed to result in hits if re-queried
> (applying original fq params also). This is especially helpful when there is
> more than one correction per query. The 1.4 behavior does not verify that a
> particular combination will actually return hits.
> 2. Provide the option to get multiple collation suggestions
> 3. Provide extended collation results including the # of hits re-querying
> will return and a breakdown of each misspelled word and its correction.
> This patch is similar to what is described in SOLR-507 item #1. Also, this
> patch provides a viable workaround for the problem discussed in SOLR-1074. A
> dictionary could be created that combines the terms from the multiple fields.
> The collator then would prune out any spurious suggestions this would cause.
> This patch adds the following spellcheck parameters:
> 1. spellcheck.maxCollationTries - maximum # of collation possibilities to try
> before giving up. Lower values ensure better performance. Higher values may
> be necessary to find a collation that can return results. Default is 0,
> which maintains backwards-compatible behavior (do not check collations).
> 2. spellcheck.maxCollations - maximum # of collations to return. Default is
> 1, which maintains backwards-compatible behavior.
> 3. spellcheck.collateExtendedResult - if true, returns an expanded response
> format detailing collations found. default is false, which maintains
> backwards-compatible behavior. When true, output is like this (in context):
> <lst name="spellcheck">
> <lst name="suggestions">
> <lst name="hopq">
> <int name="numFound">94</int>
> <int name="startOffset">7</int>
> <int name="endOffset">11</int>
> <arr name="suggestion">
> <str>hope</str>
> <str>how</str>
> <str>hope</str>
> <str>chops</str>
> <str>hoped</str>
> etc
> </arr>
> <lst name="faill">
> <int name="numFound">100</int>
> <int name="startOffset">16</int>
> <int name="endOffset">21</int>
> <arr name="suggestion">
> <str>fall</str>
> <str>fails</str>
> <str>fail</str>
> <str>fill</str>
> <str>faith</str>
> <str>all</str>
> etc
> </arr>
> </lst>
> <lst name="collation">
> <str name="collationQuery">Title:(how AND fails)</str>
> <int name="hits">2</int>
> <lst name="misspellingsAndCorrections">
> <str name="hopq">how</str>
> <str name="faill">fails</str>
> </lst>
> </lst>
> <lst name="collation">
> <str name="collationQuery">Title:(hope AND faith)</str>
> <int name="hits">2</int>
> <lst name="misspellingsAndCorrections">
> <str name="hopq">hope</str>
> <str name="faill">faith</str>
> </lst>
> </lst>
> <lst name="collation">
> <str name="collationQuery">Title:(chops AND all)</str>
> <int name="hits">1</int>
> <lst name="misspellingsAndCorrections">
> <str name="hopq">chops</str>
> <str name="faill">all</str>
> </lst>
> </lst>
> </lst>
> </lst>
> In addition, SOLRJ is updated to include
> SpellCheckResponse.getCollatedResults(), which will return the expanded
> Collation format. getCollatedResult(), which returns a single String, is
> retained for backwards-compatibility. Other APIs were not changed but will
> still work provided that spellcheck.collateExtendedResult is false.
> This likely will not return valid results if using Shards. Rather, a more
> robust interaction with the index would be necessary than what exists in
> SpellCheckCollator.collate().
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
