lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hoss Man (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-903) FilteredQuery explanation inaccuracy with boost
Date Mon, 04 Jun 2007 00:12:15 GMT


Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-903:

I have some reservations about this patch.

I think it's fine to set as a goal that all "core" query classes should have Explanations
where the description accurately describes a mathematical calculation that can be performed
on the details to arrive at the value of the Explanation -- which is easy to do since we have
the luxury of changing the CHeckHits class to suit our needs anytime we add a new class that
has a more "interesting" mathematical calculation then we can current account for.

But we should also try to maintain CheckHIts as a reusable class that clients can use to run
basic sanity tests on their own custom Query classes, and holding them to the same standard
(when they can't easily modify the string pattern rules in CheckHits) doesn't seem fair.

lemme try to refactor the current patch a bit so that the "deep" Explanation testing is optional
(and used by the core tests)

> FilteredQuery explanation inaccuracy with boost
> -----------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-903
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Search
>    Affects Versions: 2.2
>            Reporter: Doron Cohen
>            Assignee: Doron Cohen
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 2.2
>         Attachments: lucene-903.patch
> The value of explanation is different than the product of its part if boost > 1.
> This is exposed after tightening the explanation check (part of LUCENE-446).

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message