Re: Analyzing Infix Suggestor Exact Match Boost

> abc > abc def > > And both these terms were indexed with the same weight. > Now suppose in my query i type abc i want the exact match to be returned > first and then the other matches. > But what ive observed is that which term is indexed first is returned > first. So

Analyzing Infix Suggestor Exact Match Boost

Hi, Im using analyzing infix suggestor. I have a use case for which i cant find a solution to so if anyone can help me out with that. Suppose i index two terms :- abc abc def And both these terms were indexed with the same weight. Now suppose in my query i type abc i want the exact match to be

RE: query on exact match in lucene

Sounds like you need a PhraseQuery. -Original Message- From: madan mp [mailto:madan20...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 7:40 AM To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: query on exact match in lucene how to get exact string match ex- i am searching for file which consist of

query on exact match in lucene

how to get exact string match ex- i am searching for file which consist of string "i am fine" but it use to throw file which consist string "am i fine " but i need those file having "i am fine" please help me out on this one. regards

Re: Lucene Exact Match On Analyzed Field

KeywordAnalyzer is the normal thing to use if you want exact matches. -- Ian. On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Yogesh patel wrote: > Hi > > I would like to search on any analyzed field of lucene index with Exact > Match. > > Is it possible to search with exact match k

Re: Exact Match Query in Lucene with SnowBall Analyzer

Hi, The behavior is expected with stemming. Have you tried using StandardAnalyzer which do not do stemming? -- Jan Høydahl, search solution architect Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com Solr Training - www.solrtraining.com On 9. mai 2012, at 08:12, Yogesh patel wrote: > I am using Lucene and i hav

Exact Match Query in Lucene with SnowBall Analyzer

I am using Lucene and i have one question about it I am using Snowball analyzer with English version. My index has below columns (1) id (2) Content i.e Id Content _ 1 This is murder case and murdering is crime 2 The wife of a Mumbai

Re: There is a mismatch between the score for a wildcard match and an exact match

On 09/03/2012 12:23, Paul Taylor wrote: On 09/03/2012 10:42, Paul Taylor wrote: There is a mismatch between the score for a wildcard match and an exact match Just found the problem has been reported https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2557 not quite whether there is a solution

Re: There is a mismatch between the score for a wildcard match and an exact match

On 09/03/2012 10:42, Paul Taylor wrote: There is a mismatch between the score for a wildcard match and an exact match Just found the problem has been reported https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2557 not quite whether there is a solution available yet. Paul

There is a mismatch between the score for a wildcard match and an exact match

There is a mismatch between the score for a wildcard match and an exact match I search for |recording:live OR recording:luve* | And here is the Explain Output from Search |DocNo:0:1.4196585:-1cf0-4d1f-aca7-2a6f89e34b36 1.4196585 = (MATCH) max plus0.1 times others of: 0.3763506

Re: Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match

On 28/01/2012 11:22, Uwe Schindler wrote: -Original Message- From: Paul Taylor [mailto:paul_t...@fastmail.fm] Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 10:33 AM To: 'java-user@lucene.apache.org' Subject: Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match All things being equal does a f

Re: Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match

On 28/01/2012 11:22, Uwe Schindler wrote: -Original Message- From: Paul Taylor [mailto:paul_t...@fastmail.fm] Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 10:33 AM To: 'java-user@lucene.apache.org' Subject: Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match All things being equal does a f

RE: Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match

> > >> -Original Message- > > >> From: Paul Taylor [mailto:paul_t...@fastmail.fm] > > >> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 10:33 AM > > >> To: 'java-user@lucene.apache.org' > > >> Subject: Does Fuzzy Search scores the

RE: Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match

es Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match > > On 28/01/2012 09:36, Uwe Schindler wrote: > > Hi, > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Paul Taylor [mailto:paul_t...@fastmail.fm] > >> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 10:33 AM > >&

Re: Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match

On 28/01/2012 09:36, Uwe Schindler wrote: Hi, -Original Message- From: Paul Taylor [mailto:paul_t...@fastmail.fm] Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 10:33 AM To: 'java-user@lucene.apache.org' Subject: Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match All things being equal do

RE: Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match

Hi, > -Original Message- > From: Paul Taylor [mailto:paul_t...@fastmail.fm] > Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2012 10:33 AM > To: 'java-user@lucene.apache.org' > Subject: Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match > > All things being equal does a fuzzy

Does Fuzzy Search scores the same as Exact Match

All things being equal does a fuzzy match give the same score as an exact match. i.e if I do a search for farmin and it matches two docs one on term farmin, the other on term farming, will it score farming higher or score both the same ? Paul

Re: Can't perform exact match...?

On 4/11/2011 1:47 AM, Chris Mantle wrote: > Hi, I’m having some trouble with Lucene at the moment. I have a number of > unique identifiers that I need to search through. They’re in many different > forms, eg. “M”, “MO”, “:MOFB”, “FH..L-O”, etc. All I need to do is an exact > prefix search: at th

Can't perform exact match...?

Hi, I’m having some trouble with Lucene at the moment. I have a number of unique identifiers that I need to search through. They’re in many different forms, eg. “M”, “MO”, “:MOFB”, “FH..L-O”, etc. All I need to do is an exact prefix search: at the moment, if I type in ‘M’, I get “M”, “MO” and “:

Re: Exact match with fuzzy query

> > Yes bauer~0.8 bauer as query will bring you both exact > and fuzzy matches. > > Is this the normal way to do it? Somehow. 'bauer~0.8 OR bauer' is easiest way to fuzzy search which also finds exact matches. > Unfortunately this parser seems to be missing in 3.0.1 http://lucene.apache.org/

Re: Exact match with fuzzy query

Am 12.06.2010 13:57, schrieb Ahmet Arslan: I am using lucene 3.0.1. I use a MultiFieldQueryParser with a GermanAnalyzer. In my index are some values among others one document with the title "bauer". I append to every word in my query a ~0.8 (here I am not sure if this is the way to do it). If I

Re: Exact match with fuzzy query

> I am using lucene 3.0.1. I use a MultiFieldQueryParser with > a GermanAnalyzer. In my index are some values among others > one document with the title "bauer". I append to every word > in my query a ~0.8 (here I am not sure if this is the way to > do it). If I try to search now, I will not get th

Exact match with fuzzy query

Hi, I am using lucene 3.0.1. I use a MultiFieldQueryParser with a GermanAnalyzer. In my index are some values among others one document with the title "bauer". I append to every word in my query a ~0.8 (here I am not sure if this is the way to do it). If I try to search now, I will not get th

Re: NumericField exact match

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Ivan Vasilev wrote: > Does it matter precision step when I use NumericRangeQuery for exact > matches? No. There is a full-precision version of the value indexed regardless of the precision step, and that's used for an exact match query. > I mea

Re: NumericField exact match

eld"; 2. I will never hit docs with different that have diferent "val" for the "field"; Ivan Uwe Schindler wrote: It's very easy: NumericRangeQuery.nexXxxRange(field, val, val, true, true) - val is the exact match. This is not slower as this automatically rewrit

RE: NumericField exact match

It's very easy: NumericRangeQuery.nexXxxRange(field, val, val, true, true) - val is the exact match. This is not slower as this automatically rewrites to a non-scored TermQuery. If you already changed QueryParser, you can also override the method for exactMatches (newTermQuery).

NumericField exact match

Hi Guys, Is it possible to make exact searches on fields that are of type NumericField and if yes how? In the LIA book part 2 I found only information about Range searches on such fields and how to Sort them. Example - I have field "size" that can take integers as values. I want to get docs t

Re: Exact match on entire field

You should probably tell us the reason to why you need this functionallity. Given you only load the stored comparative field for the first it doesn't really have to be that expensive. If you know that the first hit was not a perfect match then you know that any matching documents with a l

Re: Exact match on entire field

how much data are you talking about here? Could you use a KeywordAnalyzer (perhaps in a duplicated field) with appropriate filtering (to lowercase, remove punctuation, etc)? Best Erick On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 4:50 AM, Laura Hollink wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to distinguish between a document t

Exact match on entire field

Hi, I am trying to distinguish between a document that matches the query because the query *appears* in one of the fields, and a document that matches the query because the query equals the complete field. I do want to use an Analyzer for case- and punctuation normalization. For example:

Re: Exact match query on a field in index which has been indexed using StandardAnalyzer

14 maj 2008 kl. 17.30 skrev Erick Erickson: Another possibility would be to introduce marker tokens in your field, index something like "$ member of technical staff $" and then, when querying for exact matches, *add* the $ tokens to the beginning and end of the query. Just a note, I've hit pro

Re: Exact match query on a field in index which has been indexed using StandardAnalyzer

N_TOKENIZED field first Best Erick On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 1:14 AM, Gauri Shankar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks Erick... > > My index size is ~2 GB. Is it a good idea to keep another duplicate field > as UN_TOKENIZED and search using KeywordAnalyzer? > > Few point

Re: Exact match query on a field in index which has been indexed using StandardAnalyzer

Thanks Erick... My index size is ~2 GB. Is it a good idea to keep another duplicate field as UN_TOKENIZED and search using KeywordAnalyzer? Few points: 1. when I say exact match then I mean the exact phrase match only. That implies the query should not match a document with the field value

Re: Exact match query on a field in index which has been indexed using StandardAnalyzer

t; I have a field in index which has been indexed using StandardAnalyzer and > as > TOKENIZED. Now I would like to write a query which returns the hit if > there > is a exact match on the field value. > > Say, if field value is : Member of Technical Staff > then "member of technical sta

Exact match query on a field in index which has been indexed using StandardAnalyzer

Hi, I have a field in index which has been indexed using StandardAnalyzer and as TOKENIZED. Now I would like to write a query which returns the hit if there is a exact match on the field value. Say, if field value is : Member of Technical Staff then "member of technical staff" OR

Re: Looking for "Exact match but no other terms"... how to express it?

On Tuesday 30 October 2007 16:58:09 Tobias Hill wrote: > I want to match on the exact phrase "foo bar dot" on a > specific field on my set of documents. > > I only want results where that field has exactly "foo bar dot" > and no more terms. I.e. A document with "foo bar dot alu" > should not match.

Re: Looking for "Exact match but no other terms"... how to express it?

30 okt 2007 kl. 16.58 skrev Tobias Hill: I only want results where that field has exactly "foo bar dot" and no more terms. I.e. A document with "foo bar dot alu" should not match. A phrase query with slop 0 seems resonable but how do I express "but nothing more than these terms". There is n

Re: Looking for "Exact match but no other terms"... how to express it?

Tobias Hill wrote: I want to match on the exact phrase "foo bar dot" on a specific field on my set of documents. I only want results where that field has exactly "foo bar dot" and no more terms. I.e. A document with "foo bar dot alu" should not match. A phrase query with slop 0 seems resonable

Re: stemmed search and exact match on "same" field

Thank you, Chris. You have confirmed what I had all but resigned myself to (and you summarized my goal precisely). I am sticking with the two versions of the field and just accepting the fact that the search clients will need to use my custom query parser. Even if one doesn't get the answer one w

Re: stemmed search and exact match on "same" field

Thank you, Chris. You have confirmed what I had all but resigned myself to (and you summarized my goal precisely). I am sticking with the two versions of the field and just accepting the fact that the search clients will need to use my custom query parser. Even if one doesn't get the answer one w

Re: stemmed search and exact match on "same" field

here is not way to tell them apart at query time. : Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:53:36 -0400 (EDT) : From: Robert Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org : To: java-user@lucene.apache.org : Subject: stemmed search and exact match on "same" field : : I'

stemmed search and exact match on "same" field

so concerned that this will skew the scoring.) While I would like the queries +fox +dog "jumps over the lazy dogs" to match, the following should not match: "jump over the lazy dog" because in my world, the quotes demand an exact match. Any ideas would be appreciat

Re: Exact match on a single term / word

: I am trying to get Lucene to perform an exact match on a single term or word : using the default query parser. It works fine whenever I have more than one : word / term in the search string (it parses the string into a PhraseQuery : with a slop of 0 which is correct). However when the search

Re: Exact match on a single term / word

ne to perform an exact match on a single term or word using the default query parser. It works fine whenever I have more than one word / term in the search string (it parses the string into a PhraseQuery with a slop of 0 which is correct). However when the search string just contains a single wo

Exact match on a single term / word

I am trying to get Lucene to perform an exact match on a single term or word using the default query parser. It works fine whenever I have more than one word / term in the search string (it parses the string into a PhraseQuery with a slop of 0 which is correct). However when the search string just

Re: Exact Match Searches and Stop Words

Hugh Ross wrote: The problem is that the standard analyzer removes the stop word (i.e. "of") before indexing and searching. Is there an workaround for this? See my response to a similar question here: In

Exact Match Searches and Stop Words

I am running an exact match search using an index which was created using the StandardAnalyzer. My problem is that when I do an exact match search on this index and look for a phrase such as content:"Head of State" using the query parser (StandardAnalyzer again for searching), the sea

Re: exact match ..

The way I have solved the problem of allowing exact matches is, for each field in which it is possible for an exact match to be requested, a parallel field is created at index time that is unstemmed and has a specific prefix: if (fieldData.isSearched() &&

Re: exact match ..

On Feb 20, 2006, at 1:22 PM, Mufaddal Khumri wrote: Just realized that the various fields I have are part of the same document. But in order to leverage the KeywordAnalyzer, I would have to now have two sets of document. One document with the fields: title, content <--- analyzed by custom a

Re: exact match ..

On Feb 20, 2006, at 1:02 PM, Mufaddal Khumri wrote: If I understand you right, I could use something like the Keyword analyzer to tokenize the entire stream as a single token and store that in the index. I could definitely the keyword analyzer while indexing this particular field "categoryN

Re: exact match ..

Hi, Just realized that the various fields I have are part of the same document. But in order to leverage the KeywordAnalyzer, I would have to now have two sets of document. One document with the fields: title, content <--- analyzed by custom analyzer Other document with the fields: categoryNam

Re: exact match ..

Hi Steve, If I understand you right, I could use something like the Keyword analyzer to tokenize the entire stream as a single token and store that in the index. I could definitely the keyword analyzer while indexing this particular field "categoryNames". Now my questions is on how to search

Re: exact match ..

Mufaddal Khumri wrote: lets say i do this while indexing: doc.add(Field.Text("categoryNames", categoryNames)); Now while searching categoryNames, I do a search for "digital cameras". I only want to match the exact phrase digital cameras with documents who have exactly the phrase "digital came

exact match ..

lets say i do this while indexing: doc.add(Field.Text("categoryNames", categoryNames)); Now while searching categoryNames, I do a search for "digital cameras". I only want to match the exact phrase digital cameras with documents who have exactly the phrase "digital cameras" in the categoryName

Re[4]: exact match

Hello, Erik. I have very large index (200Gb) with big amount of documents. I have field "author", which stores name and this fields is tokenized, indexed, stored. This field contains values of following examples: "John" "John Doe" "Bill" "Bill Gates" I do not want to reindex all documents again.

Re[2]: exact match

d for tokenized values? if not, then you can just use an analyzer that knows about this special field and "tokenizes" any value it gets into a single token that is an exact match. if you sometimes need exact matches, and sometimes need "ord" matches (for hte sake of argument l

Re: Re[2]: exact match

On Apr 5, 2005, at 5:44 AM, Yura Smolsky wrote: EH> On Apr 4, 2005, at 4:34 PM, Yura Smolsky wrote: Hello, java-user. I have documents with tokenized, indexes and stored field. This field contain one-two words usually. I need to be able to search exact matches for two words. For example search "Joh

Re[2]: exact match

Hello, Erik. EH> On Apr 4, 2005, at 4:34 PM, Yura Smolsky wrote: >> Hello, java-user. >> >> I have documents with tokenized, indexes and stored field. This field >> contain one-two words usually. I need to be able to search exact >> matches for two words. >> For example search "John" should retur

Re: exact match

containing "John" only, not "John Doe" or "John Foo". Any ideas? Use an untokenized field to search on in the case of finding an exact match. Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

exact match

Hello, java-user. I have documents with tokenized, indexes and stored field. This field contain one-two words usually. I need to be able to search exact matches for two words. For example search "John" should return documents with field containing "John" only, not "John Doe" or "John Foo". Any id