Then surely the stop word issue is a red herring. Using MFQP with AND
everywhere you'll never get a match if some fields don't contain all
of the search terms.
Even if Erick's exact answer won't apply, I suspect that building up a
composite boolean query is the way to go.
--
Ian.
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Elmer <evanchaste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, I made a mistake here:
>
>> Unfortunately, the solution that Erick gave won't do the trick
>> > > bq.add(qp.parse("title:(the AND project)", SHOULD))
>> > > bq.add(qp.parse("desc:(the AND project)", SHOULD))
>> This still won't match documents where both 'the' and 'project' appear
>> in DIFFERENT fields (i.e. a document with title: 'Lucene project' and
>> desc: 'the open source search software from Apache')
>
> Correction: this will actually match the example query ('the project'),
> but this solution won't work if the search query is changed to: 'the
> search project', since 'search' is not in the title field.
>
> Br,
> Elmer
>
>
> On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 16:35 +0200, Elmer wrote:
>> Thank you,
>>
>> I already use the PerFieldAnalyzerWrapper (by Hibernate Search) ;)
>> And that's where the problem comes in: different fields using different
>> analyzers (some with, some without a stopfilter). For each term
>> (tokenized by MFQP itself?), it applies the given analyzer on each
>> field. If the analyzer returns no token (occurs on 'the' when using the
>> PerFieldAnalyzerWrapper for the desc field), that field will not be
>> included in the clause for that term. (see/re-read the example, maybe
>> it's more clear what I mean now).
>>
>> Unfortunately, the solution that Erick gave won't do the trick
>> > > bq.add(qp.parse("title:(the AND project)", SHOULD))
>> > > bq.add(qp.parse("desc:(the AND project)", SHOULD))
>> This still won't match documents where both 'the' and 'project' appear
>> in DIFFERENT fields (i.e. a document with title: 'Lucene project' and
>> desc: 'the open source search software from Apache')
>>
>> I hope it's clear what I mean :) Otherwise, let me know!
>>
>> BR,
>> Elmer
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 14:42 +0100, Ian Lea wrote:
>> > Except that I think he has loads of other fields and wants to keep it
>> > simple.
>> >
>> > But how about passing a PerFieldAnalyzerWrapper instance as the
>> > analyzer to MFQP? Worth a try.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Ian.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > Could you just construct a BooleanQuery with the
>> > > terms against different fields instead of using MFQP?
>> > > e.g.
>> > >
>> > > bq.add(qp.parse("title:(the AND project)", SHOULD))
>> > > bq.add(qp.parse("desc:(the AND project)", SHOULD))
>> > >
>> > > etc...? If your QueryParser was created with a
>> > > PerFieldAnalyzerWrapper I think you might get what you
>> > > want....
>> > >
>> > > Note, bad pseudo code there...
>> > >
>> > > Best
>> > > Erick
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Elmer <evanchaste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >> Hi,
>> > >>
>> > >> I have a use case in which I use the MultiFieldQueryParser (MFQP) on
>> > >> some fields that use and some fields that don't use a stopfilter. The
>> > >> default operator of the MFQP is set to AND.
>> > >> For example, if the search query is 'the project' (with 'the' included
>> > >> in the stoplist) and the search fields are:
>> > >>
>> > >> title - not using a stopfilter,
>> > >> desc - using a stopfilter,
>> > >>
>> > >> the parsed query becomes:
>> > >>
>> > >> '+(title:the) +(title:project desc:project)'.
>> > >>
>> > >> So, the problem is that docs that have the term 'the' only appearing in
>> > >> their desc field are excluded from the results. So every query, with AND
>> > >> as default operator, that has a stop word in it that only appears in
>> > >> fields that use a stop filter will have this problem (or similar, if
>> > >> there is at least one field X not using a stopfilter -> no match if a
>> > >> stopword from query doesn't appear in field X). Thus, in this example, a
>> > >> document with title: 'Lucene project' and desc: 'the open source search
>> > >> software from Apache' will not be matched. In my opinion this is not the
>> > >> expected behavior. What I'd like to see is that this doc is matched by
>> > >> the given query. So, for each token in the query, that appears to be a
>> > >> stopword in a field (i.e. some filter filters the token out), I want it
>> > >> to be matched instead of not.
>> > >>
>> > >> Anyone who knows a way to deal with this? I would prefer to keep using
>> > >> the MFQP, since I need to support multiple fields, querytime boosting
>> > >> and lucene syntax. Or is there a disadvantage by doing this?
>> > >>
>> > >> Thanks in advance.
>> > >>
>> > >> BR,
>> > >> Elmer van Chastelet
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
