lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hoss Man (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Updated: (SOLR-1553) extended dismax query parser
Date Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:28:05 GMT


Hoss Man updated SOLR-1553:

    Attachment: edismax.unescapedcolon.bug.test.patch

On the train this past weekend i started trying to tackle the issue of making support for
field based queries (ie: "fieldA:valueB") configurable so that it could be turned on/off for
certain fields (or left off completely for back-compat with dismax)

Based on yonik's description of edismax, and my initial reading of the code (particularly
the use of clause.field and getFieldName in ExtendedDismaxQParser) i was under the impression
that if a "clause" consisting of FOO:BAR was encountered, and FOO was not a known field, that
the clause would be treated as a literal, and the colon would be escaped before passing it
on to ExtendedSolrQueryParser ... essentially that FOO:BAR and FOO\:BAR would be equivalent
if FOO is not the name of a real field according to the IndexSchema.

For reasons I don't fully understand yet, this isn't the case -- as the attached test shows,
the queries are parsed differently, and (evidently) FOO:BAR is parsed as an empty query if
FOO is not a real field.

Before I try digging into this too much, I wanted to sanity check:
* is this expected? ... was this done intentionally?
* is this desired? ... is this logical default behavior to have if the field isn't defined?
should we have tests to assert this before i start adding more config options to change the

> extended dismax query parser
> ----------------------------
>                 Key: SOLR-1553
>                 URL:
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>            Reporter: Yonik Seeley
>             Fix For: 1.5
>         Attachments: edismax.unescapedcolon.bug.test.patch, SOLR-1553.patch,
> An improved user-facing query parser based on dismax

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

View raw message