Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 68320 invoked from network); 20 Jul 2010 10:14:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 20 Jul 2010 10:14:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 95537 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jul 2010 10:14:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 95218 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jul 2010 10:14:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact solr-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list solr-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 95210 invoked by uid 99); 20 Jul 2010 10:14:52 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:14:52 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.5 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of bibryam@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.48 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.214.48] (HELO mail-bw0-f48.google.com) (209.85.214.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 10:14:45 +0000 Received: by bwz2 with SMTP id 2so4467905bwz.35 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 03:14:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=q0YDrz7FOFOLhXVGNA1XF+tac8oprB12BA+/96wOKiQ=; b=BWByN8wmKnU6uSelA4py6I9MiCXCHQbgOQVNXnoJXDLTMBymY7Lwm9A89haRV/6XXk kb1FFRrYys2Hv4tgMwdkevfR9KU09eGRIomiglO+GEgyHhcNFI5yuziJEnEObBV3dBQg vD8kbnQVMJVR/Sbux1P1XINBqxwGYnJI2Ndqw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=FlrfKLSHROPeR6vngNYHe+9a/qn494/BVtJ1p6ROEGrhXlqkao4F/NRDNOidDOpY/r ERgNQ+/Xvv+xvVQncbUWRg+muDv/w5e0UQSvUOQwXmMDCIEdjcMvfKoiwsxPNyuyMTav hFgiQ+wT9epvRcW/SiU3qBXS40uNw2ipKz7KA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.25.16 with SMTP id x16mr4951381bkb.173.1279620863956; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 03:14:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.117.15 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 03:14:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1279619208212-980819.post@n3.nabble.com> References: <376FF54A-3E25-4F12-8EA4-1474D673F4B9@gmail.com> <1279619208212-980819.post@n3.nabble.com> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:14:23 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Beginner question From: Bilgin Ibryam To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00032555a42e0b15ab048bcef35d X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --00032555a42e0b15ab048bcef35d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Thanks for the answers guys. So I assume that storing entity each field in as a separate index field is correct, since they will get different scoring. Is it possible to use dismax query parser using solrJ, since this is how I'm going to access solr? On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 10:46 AM, MitchK wrote: > > Here you can find params and their meanings for the dismax-handler. > You may not find anything in the wiki by searching for a parser ;). > > Link: http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DisMaxRequestHandler Wiki: > DisMaxRequestHandler > > Kind regards > - Mitch > > > > Erik Hatcher-4 wrote: > > > > Consider using the dismax query parser instead. It has more > > sophisticated capability to spread user queries across multiple fields > > with different weightings. > > > > Erik > > > > On Jul 20, 2010, at 4:34 AM, Bilgin Ibryam wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I have two simple questions: > >> > >> I have an Item entity with id, name, category and description > >> fields. The > >> main requirements is to be able to search in all the fields with the > >> same > >> string and different priority per field, so matches in name appear > >> before > >> category matches, and they appear before description field matches > >> in the > >> result list. > >> > >> 1. I think to create an index having the same fields, because each > >> field > >> needs different priority during searching. > >> > >> 2. And then do the search with a query like this: > >> name:search_string^1.3 OR categpry:search_string^1.2 OR > >> description:search_string^1.1 > >> > >> Is this the right approach to model the index and search query? > >> > >> Thanks in advance. > >> Bilgin > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Beginner-question-tp980695p980819.html > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > --00032555a42e0b15ab048bcef35d--