Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1215F9C88 for ; Fri, 7 Oct 2011 17:37:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 24562 invoked by uid 500); 7 Oct 2011 17:37:35 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 24516 invoked by uid 500); 7 Oct 2011 17:37:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 24508 invoked by uid 99); 7 Oct 2011 17:37:35 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Oct 2011 17:37:35 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_NEUTRAL,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [72.30.239.9] (HELO nm31-vm1.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com) (72.30.239.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Fri, 07 Oct 2011 17:37:28 +0000 Received: from [98.139.214.32] by nm31.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Oct 2011 17:37:07 -0000 Received: from [98.139.213.2] by tm15.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Oct 2011 17:37:07 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp102.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Oct 2011 17:37:07 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.de; s=s1024; t=1318009027; bh=bFjrIb84PmGJb0jCiwvSAvednPFFjF3hBzyZyBsvods=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=R1md9dpOLQuMR36odiCyvlz0WQ3M/um1nTaEC1/i0UYUkl/h046f708SuOsnrT2QM0Dva0nh8MKnza796i3oLk/nWyYOlq3Uh8odPL9moZFTSA25RrGTOQLOqFRSWRCyveiu00z2xfDfmrGWueSn9caewMiE3Qovun6Y7GnOjtQ= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 133146.86550.bm@smtp102.mail.bf1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: Jl9QsOkVM1kKNiPb_YbxBDQwCkj4WpcxuRcbEmvcy4gTqwq qGMuOEE9VszyBLNXpTMcsNq4d9F1RP_C1s9M8wC5Ke64HlxVetGlIuhWrIso k4wSwrozlTg64UYAlpt42oZvKEbxV67gReZxEhKYAqjllwZZy2v0iMi.HlZD JWnSuO4nOIj2ex7JhYELf_F3FctDOB30jVEs7EP2vdZ4gXyJw1vlhWC0a1qw W.d.zYIqWyhOwgT1wV.x0jMMWWZ2UAW4ZrqO1vQ8yzGix_KWnRYa7M5MY4U6 7BEzPGAM5ZzeDV54Ybwk3HiylufVaa3ZoE.XZbYs240N1Iyo986LvIXpx8FT E4_6MbiagvaaTr5V5nzJ_HNhXd6qztiTvJelJzdBWq4OrL5_uLc1pfTr_03P UxlqwNM.W979qZpxNjPJguZt5GP3vnBXSmaJ42FnTtFozT4yCNhz0AzOgPH8 Ab.mN7aO_1K.CGje27u6GjZY9TIKUaCktiQ52FWYAQ9Q1gzDV7lmW9BR6_J3 eWdh6O8vus5suSjpbQYYaEZiEMdR1r1mtak0fHNDblGxSam7WXhpqg6080GY 6PQ-- X-Yahoo-SMTP: PsU70jWswBCjvY7DVEwAV7Ld71kq2utxAu93BRGFPho- Received: from [127.0.0.1] (mailformailinglists@80.187.96.16 with plain) by smtp102.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 07 Oct 2011 10:37:06 -0700 PDT Message-ID: <4E8F38BF.3000307@yahoo.de> Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 19:37:03 +0200 From: Em User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: How is Number of Boolean Clauses calculated - Minimum Should Match? References: <4E8C0A81.6090107@yahoo.de> <001701cc8342$9de19a70$d9a4cf50$@thetaphi.de> <4E8C2FEA.80300@yahoo.de> <4E8C397C.1000106@yahoo.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi Hoss, I read your article. I have to review the solr-code but with the help of your pseudo-code I think I understand what goes on now. Thank you! Regards, Em Am 05.10.2011 20:19, schrieb Chris Hostetter: > > : > Presumably this query would fail, since you've only got three clauses. > : > Easy to verify. > : > : Seems like different behaviour compared to Solr. Probably Solr is > : intelligent enough to reduce the parameter to the maximum value if it is > : too large. > > correct, the dismax parser in solr is smart enough not to calculate an > illegal value for minNrShouldMatch using the mm param. > > : >> If so, what is the problem in Solr with Stopwords and the Dismax-Parser? > > the problem people sometimes have understanding the interaction of the dismax > parser and stopwords comes from using sotpwords in the analyzers > for *some* fields they are querying but not others, and then being > suprised that the stopwords are still part of their overall query (in the > fields where they didn't use them in their analyzer)... > > https://wiki.apache.org/solr/DisMax > http://www.lucidimagination.com/blog/2010/05/23/whats-a-dismax/ > > ...note in particula the "Where people tend to get tripped up..." para in > that blog post > > > -Hoss > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org