lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Phong Dais <phong.gd...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Highlighting for non-stored fields
Date Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:44:29 GMT
Thanks for the insight.
This is definitely a feasible solution because I only need to highlight when
the user open the document.
I guess the easiest way I can do this is to "reuse" the solr code (with some
modification) in my own application.

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Pradeep Singh <pksinghus@gmail.com> wrote:

> Another way you can do this is - after the search has completed, load the
> field in your application, write separate code to reanalyze that
> field/document, index it in RAM, and run it through highlighter classes.
> All
> this as part of your web application outside of Solr. Considering the size
> of your data it doesn't look advisable to store it because then you would
> be
> almost doubling the size of your index (if you are looking to highlight on
> a
> field then it's probably going to be full of content).
>
> -Pradeep
>
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Phong Dais <phong.gdais@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I understand that I need to store the fields in order to use highlighting
> > "out of the box".
> > I'm looking for a way to highlighting using term offsets instead of the
> > actual text since the text is not stored.  What am asking is is it
> possible
> > to modify the response (thru custom implementation) to contain
> highlighted
> > offsets instead of the actual matched text.  Should I be writing my own
> > DefaultHighlighter?  Or overiding some of its functionality?  Can this be
> > done this way or am I way off?
> >
> > BTW, I'm using solr-1.4.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > P.
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Israel Ekpo <israelekpo@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Check out this link
> > >
> > > http://wiki.apache.org/solr/FieldOptionsByUseCase
> > >
> > > You need to store the field if you want to use the highlighting
> feature.
> > >
> > > If you need to retrieve and display the highlighted snippets then the
> > > fields
> > > definitely needs to be stored.
> > >
> > > To use term offsets, it will be a good idea to enable the following
> > > attributes for that field  termVectors termPositions termOffsets
> > >
> > > The only issue here is that your storage costs will increase because of
> > > these extra features.
> > >
> > > Nevertheless, you definitely need to store the field if you need to
> > > retrieve
> > > it for highlighting purposes.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Phong Dais <phong.gdais@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I've been looking thru the mailing archive for the past week and I
> > > haven't
> > > > found any useful info regarding this issue.
> > > >
> > > > My requirement is to index a few terabytes worth of data to be
> > searched.
> > > > Due to the size of the data, I would like to index without storing
> but
> > I
> > > > would like to use the highlighting feature.  Is this even possible?
> >  What
> > > > are my options?
> > > >
> > > > I've read about termOffsets, payload that could possibly be used to
> do
> > > this
> > > > but I have no idea how this could be done.
> > > >
> > > > Any pointers greatly appreciated.  Someone please point me in the
> right
> > > > direction.
> > > >
> > > >  I don't mind having to write some code or digging thru existing code
> > to
> > > > accomplish this task.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > P.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > °O°
> > > "Good Enough" is not good enough.
> > > To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift.
> > > Quality First. Measure Twice. Cut Once.
> > > http://www.israelekpo.com/
> > >
> >
>

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