On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am trying to solve a problem using DisjunctionMaxQuery. > > > Consider a query like: > > a:b OR c:d OR e:f OR ... > name:richard OR name:dick OR name:dickie OR name:rich ... > > At most, one of the richard names matches. So the match score gets > dragged down by the long list of things that don't match, as the list > can get quite long. > > It seemed to me, upon reading the documentation, that I could cure > this problem by creating a query tree that used DisjunctionMaxQuery > around all those nicknames. However, when I built a boolean query that > had, as a clause, a DisjunctionMaxQuery in the place of a pile of > these individual Term queries, the score and the explanation did not > change at all -- in particular, the coord term shows the same number > of total terms. So it looks as if the children of the disjunction > still count. > > Is there a way to control that term? Or a better way to express this? > Thinking SQL for a moment, what I'm trying to express is > > name IN (richard, dick, dickie, rich) >
I think you just want to disable coord() here? You can do this for that particular boolean query by passing true to the ctor: public BooleanQuery(boolean disableCoord) -- lucidimagination.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
