> Ingram Content Group
>> (615) 213-4311
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Samuel García Martínez [mailto:samuelgmarti...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 2:33 AM
>> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: possible bug on
t; http://lucene.apache.org/core/4_0_0/suggest/org/apache/lucene/search/spell/DirectSpellChecker.html
> >
> >
> > -- Jack Krupansky
> >
> > -----Original Message- From: Samuel García Martínez
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:34 PM
> > To: java-user@lucen
]
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 2:33 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: possible bug on Spellchecker
Importance: Low
I'm using Solr 3.6 and DirectSpellchecker is available only on v4+.
Moreover, in "big" indexes i prefer using sidekick index rather than
iterating over
Message- From: Samuel García Martínez
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:34 PM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: possible bug on Spellchecker
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Debugging Solr spellchecker (IndexBasedSpellchecker, delegating on lucene
> Spellchecker) behav
@lucene.apache.org
Subject: possible bug on Spellchecker
Hi all,
Debugging Solr spellchecker (IndexBasedSpellchecker, delegating on lucene
Spellchecker) behaviour i think i found a bug when the input is a 6 letter
word:
- george
- anthem
- argued
- fluent
Due to the getMin() and getMax() the
Hi all,
Debugging Solr spellchecker (IndexBasedSpellchecker, delegating on lucene
Spellchecker) behaviour i think i found a bug when the input is a 6 letter
word:
- george
- anthem
- argued
- fluent
Due to the getMin() and getMax() the grams indexed for these terms are 3
and 4. So, the fi
