Sorry, I was at Lucene Revolution, and out of circulation for a while.
I agree with your point that "it depends" (what correct behavior is).
Seems like a lot of Solr/Lucene has that answer...
But as to stop words, the trend lately is to NOT remove them
anyway. The whole stop word issue comes from
Hi Erick,
I think answer to this question depends which hat you put on.
If you put search engine hat (or do similar things in, i.e. Google),
the results will be the same as what Lucene does at the moment. And
that's fair enough - getting more results in search engine world is
almost always better
Hmmm, somehow I missed this days ago
Anyway, the Lucene query parsing process isn't quite Boolean logic.
I encourage you to think in terms of "required", "optional", and
"prohibited".
Both queries are equivalent, to see this try attaching &debugQuery=on
to your URL and look at the "parsed que
Not much luck so far :(
Just in case if anyone wants to earn some virtual dosh, I have added
some 50 bonus points to this question on StackOverflow:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6044061/lucene-query-parsing-behaviour-joining-query-parts-with-and
I also promise to post a solution here if an
Hi,
Let's say we have an index having few documents indexed using
StopAnalyzer.ENGLISH_STOP_WORDS_SET. The user issues two queries:
1) foo:bar
2) baz:"there is"
Let's assume that the first query yields some results because there
are documents matching that query.
The second query contains two st
