lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevin Osborn <osbo...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Creating a new QParserPlugin
Date Thu, 07 May 2009 22:24:16 GMT
I had a case where I was extending the DisMax parser. So,  my class MyNewDxMaxQParserPlugin
extends QParserPlugin. But, I just copied and pasted from DixMaxQParserPlugin.java. Sure,
doesn't reuse all the code, but in my case I just needed the existing code as an example and
then I had to change it in a few places. Rather than dealing with inheritence, etc., it was
simpler to just contol the code on my own.




________________________________
From: KaktuChakarabati <jimmoefoe@gmail.com>
To: solr-dev@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2009 4:22:56 PM
Subject: Creating a new QParserPlugin


(Forwarded from solr-users, I figured its more appropriate here.. )

Hello everyone,
I am trying to write a new QParserPlugin+QParser, one that will work similar
to how DisMax does, but will give me more control over the
FunctionQuery-related part of the query processing (e.g in regards to a
specified bf parameter).

In specific, I want to be able to affect the way the queryNorm (and possibly
other factors) interact with a
pre-computed value I store in a static field (i.e I compute an index-time
score for a document that I wish to use in a bf as a ValueSource, without
being affected by queryNorm or other such extranous considerations.)

While trying this, I notice I run alot into cases where some parts I try to
override/inherit from are private to a java package namespace, and this
makes the whole thing very cumbersome.

Examples for this are the DismaxQParser class which is defined as a local
class inside the DisMaxQParserPlugin.java file (i think this is bad practice
- otherwise, FunctionQParserPlugin/FunctionQParser do have their own
seperate files, so i think this is a good convention to follow generally).
Another case is where i try to inherit from FunctionQParser and end up not
being able to replicate some of the parse() logic, because it uses the
QueryParsing.StrParser class which is a static inner class and so is only
accessible from the solr.search namespace.

In short, many such cases seem to arise and i think this poses a
considerable limitation on
the possibilities of extending solr.

Otherwise, if some of you have some notions about going about what i'm
trying to do differently,
I would be happy to hear.

Thanks,
-Chak
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Creating-a-new-QParserPlugin-tp23417409p23417409.html
Sent from the Solr - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


      
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message