Mailing-List: contact solr-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of cwittern@gmail.com designates
 66.249.82.224 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=TIJvWsu6FsHjHOmNPyKUkSHQG8zJ6H7lzlJSpo6g526wB9QinWAwpQG5ek+FRrji5HfCOaiiC9F8pWxl27HwceFFqHKu7NhGeah7El9NxmRM3Ve2mmcT4KRfm2UyWpVCSSUv4CTDLrW6cArD2IPjFg9pZaYa/ytmXIQLa7qs0KY=
Message-ID: <480E8A34.6040608@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 10:00:36 +0900
From: Christian Wittern <cwittern@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Macintosh/20080213)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Highlighted field gets truncated
References: <480862F5.9010502@gmail.com>
 <ebe2c6520804180210q10c5cf43n14dd7cc8b1c9b6d3@mail.gmail.com>
 <48086E36.8020703@gmail.com> <0A188137-43DB-4551-8BE4-A02B89620215@gmail.com>
 <4809C32E.4050106@gmail.com> <1BCEB274-44F2-4561-89D0-E3244AE44366@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1BCEB274-44F2-4561-89D0-E3244AE44366@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Mike Klaas wrote:
> On 19-Apr-08, at 3:02 AM, Christian Wittern wrote:
>> So it could be that the match is not part of the fragment?  This 
>> sounds a bit strange.  Is there a way to make sure the fragment 
>> contains the match other than returning the whole field and do the 
>> fragmenting myself?
>
[...]
> As you can see, only fragments containing a match are returned (note 
> that there is very often multiple matches--you seemed to assume only 
> one).
>
Mike, thank you for the clarification.  Now I understand what went wrong 
in the example I looked at.   I am querying ngram indexed  data (Chinese 
text).  A user enters two or three characters and expect them to be 
matched more or less as a substring match.  The fragment I looked at did 
contain only one of the characters (the other was cut off at the end), 
this is what made me wondering.   From what you say, even adding 
quotation marks around the query will not prevent this from happening 
(in this case, it would simply obscure the match). 

Are there any plans to improve the algorithm for fragmentation?  Or are 
there other work arounds?
 
All the best,

Christian