Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 68D9D10961 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 08:52:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 94459 invoked by uid 500); 25 Nov 2013 08:52:02 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-solr-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 94099 invoked by uid 500); 25 Nov 2013 08:51:56 -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 94085 invoked by uid 99); 25 Nov 2013 08:51:55 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 08:51:55 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of dturnbull@opensourceconnections.com designates 209.85.223.176 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.223.176] (HELO mail-ie0-f176.google.com) (209.85.223.176) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 08:51:51 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f176.google.com with SMTP id at1so6471399iec.35 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:51:29 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=6S9/hSmqAz8sd2Gz6J73vmSFoFkZsRge4OLRNTHTFwQ=; b=NmVOOtMuLHXqAN69fxozoGJaW2YxlL3Tkf/96tpbCjM/ybCRVSnNRRMxEpmWrKZL+Z rH7x7424AZtvZEqLc6m6DO2jFXDT6Htexd8EbytvBf/4ukwMFOexB2ILc1KlQXktiXoL ay7mhu6OZXh0e9qejM8EsjHDPqXrOSboMLPPoKBpP3qEgXRLBZp6hFh8MzKwdtE0tLsQ PXfSkjbHh7qQxA61fEAk2nQBgIe3UQXh7+wsNl7J0vtk6vy3nlwvV9eiT0jM9DK7a4Dq yQ0daW2XObWXiGCDQ0IkqhJOeILzC90qwkJkCoedumKC8vZ+d1U3hw+fFK7cjXjSS+TG QePg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnDUDn32rtPATPfDKV0vFduyqZC66NKx/dNl/m/D99ftYRtI53uiiGI/6l4aIH2t1uYVChd X-Received: by 10.43.81.200 with SMTP id zz8mr15360571icb.29.1385369488957; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:51:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Doug Turnbull Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:51:28 -0800 Message-ID: <2526175811035371965@unknownmsgid> Subject: RE: Can I use boosting fields with edismax ? To: Amit Aggarwal , "solr-user@lucene.apache.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Amit its important to note that dismax/edismax isn't giving you a weighted average of these field score. Without the tie parameter one fields score is likely always "winning" the dismax contest. Field scores are relative, so 5 could be an amazing score for say "title" while 500 a terrible score for "text". Dismax picks the field that yields the maximum score, so the worst text scores might be sorted higher than the best title match. Look at your debug output and use that, rather than your sense of relative field importance, to adjust qf. I wrote a blog post on this topic that you might find helpful http://www.opensourceconnections.com/2013/07/02/getting-dissed-by-dismax-why-your-incorrect-assumptions-about-dismax-are-hurting-search-relevancy/ Sent from my Windows Phone From: Amit Aggarwal Sent: 11/25/2013 6:31 AM To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Can I use boosting fields with edismax ? Ok Erick.. I will try thanks On 25-Nov-2013 2:46 AM, "Erick Erickson" wrote: > This should work. Try adding &debug=all to your URL, and examine > the output both with and without your boosting. I believe you'll see > the difference in the score calculations. From there it's a matter > of adjusting the boosts to get the results you want. > > > Best, > Erick > > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Amit Aggarwal >wrote: > > > Hello All , > > > > I am using defType=edismax > > So will boosting will work like this in solrConfig.xml > > > > value_search^2.0 desc_search country_search^1.5 > > state_search^2.0 city_search^2.5 area_search^3.0 > > > > I think it is not working .. > > > > If yes , then what should I do ? > > >