lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gregory Tarr" <Gregory.t...@detica.com>
Subject RE: SpanNearQuery - inOrder parameter
Date Thu, 19 May 2011 09:26:11 GMT
Doron

We let our users decide whether they want to force the order or not, so
in effect they pass in "inOrder".

I would have to detect a repeated term and change the parameter as a
result of that in order to workround this - I'd rather not do that
though.

Thanks

Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: Doron Cohen [mailto:cdoronc@gmail.com] 
Sent: 19 May 2011 10:22
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: SpanNearQuery - inOrder parameter

Hi Greg,

I created http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3120 for this
problem, and attached there a more general test that exposes this
problem, based on your test case.

I am not sure yet that this is indeed  a problem to be fixed with regard
to span queries (see more there in JIRA) but at least I would like the
test case to be in JIRA.

Could you provide some context on why is this a problem for you?
That is, what is preventing you from specifying in-order?

Doron

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Gregory Tarr
<Gregory.tarr@detica.com>wrote:

> Anyone else able to reply to this?
>
> Thanks
>
> Greg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gregory Tarr
> Sent: 13 May 2011 15:46
> To: 'java-user@lucene.apache.org'
> Subject: RE: SpanNearQuery - inOrder parameter
>
> Chris, and others
>
> Thanks for your reply. In effect what you are saying is that 
> SpanNearQuery works as expected, and I should set inOrder=true to 
> obtain the behaviour I require, even though I don't care about the
order?
>
> Thanks
>
> Greg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Hostetter [mailto:hossman_lucene@fucit.org]
> Sent: 11 May 2011 00:32
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: SpanNearQuery - inOrder parameter
>
>
>
> : I attach a junit test which shows strange behaviour of the inOrder
> : parameter on the SpanNearQuery constructor, using Lucene 2.9.4.
> :
> : My understanding of this parameter is that true forces the order and
> : false doesn't care about the order.
> :
> : Using true always works. However using false works fine when the 
> terms
> : in the query are distinct, but if they are equivalent, e.g. 
> searching
> : for "john john", I do not get the expected results. The workaround 
> seems
> : to be to always use true for queries with repeated terms.
>
> I don't think the situation of "overlapping spans" has changed much 
> since this thread...
>
> http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/ee23395e5a93c525/no
> n_ overlapping_span_queries#868b3a3ec6431afc
>
> the crux of hte issue (as i recall) is that there is really no 
> conecptual reason to why a query for "'john' near 'john', in any 
> order, with slop of Z" shouldn't match a doc that contains only one 
> instance of "john" ... the first SpanTermQuery says "i found a match
at position X"
> the second SpanTermQuery says "i found a match at position Y" and the 
> SpanNearQuery says "the differnece between X and Y is less then Z"
> therefore i have a match.  (The SpanNearQuery can't fail just because 
> X and Y are the same -- they might be two distinct term instances, 
> with differnet payloads perhaps, that just happen to have the same
position).
>
> However: if true==inOrder case works because the SpanNearQuery 
> enforces that  "X must be less then Y" so the same term can't ever
match twice.
>
>
>
> -Hoss
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
> This message should be regarded as confidential. If you have received 
> this email in error please notify the sender and destroy it
immediately.
> Statements of intent shall only become binding when confirmed in hard 
> copy by an authorised signatory.  The contents of this email may 
> relate to dealings with other companies within the Detica Limited
group of companies.
>
> Detica Limited is registered in England under No: 1337451.
>
> Registered offices: Surrey Research Park, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7YP, 
> England.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
Please consider the environment before printing this email.

This message should be regarded as confidential. If you have received this email in error
please notify the sender and destroy it immediately.
Statements of intent shall only become binding when confirmed in hard copy by an authorised
signatory.  The contents of this email may relate to dealings with other companies within
the Detica Limited group of companies.

Detica Limited is registered in England under No: 1337451.

Registered offices: Surrey Research Park, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7YP, England.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message