lucy-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marvin Humphrey <>
Subject Re: [lucy-user] Identifying relevant field in $hits
Date Tue, 04 Oct 2011 16:50:48 GMT
On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 08:13:04AM +0200, goran kent wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:26 AM, Marvin Humphrey <> wrote:
> >> If so, feature request:  my @field_hit = $hits->relevant_field() would
> >> be really nice ;)
> > Peter has provided one vision, in SWISH::Prog::Lucy::Results.  I confess that
> > I don't quite understand what you've shown us above.  Can you provide some
> > context illustrating how it would be used?
> Sorry, is that last Q directed at me, or Peter?  If me, then
> @field_hit would contain my list of 'field' names in which the search
> terms were found, allowing me to do my thang.

OK, I think I basically understand.  Hits is an iterator, though, and the
fields which contributed to the score can vary per-document, so I think this
would have to be a property of the HitDoc (which happens to be how Peter has
done things).

However, I don't think it's ideal for Hits to provide an API which only works
when the user has specified an unrelated, unintuitive schema setting.  Why
does this functionality have anything to do with highlighting?  And the
granularity of 'highlightable' is per-field, while we need it to be on for
*all* indexed fields if we're to get a meaningful answer out of
relevant_fields().  Perhaps there ought to be something like an index-wide
attribute on Schema which triggers the creation of single-document inverted
indexes which includes all indexed fields?

Until such high-level design issues are worked out, if we decide that there's
a pressing need for this feature, I'd rather see it in a LucyX class that
wraps Hits.

> Is it safe to change the schema so that my 'inbound_text' field is
> highlightable (currently OFF)? - ie, there will be a mixture of the
> 'inbound_text' field in various indexes (which will end up being
> merged to large searchable indexes) with/without highlightable being
> ON.

No, that will cause a schema conflict exception; existing documents would not
have highlighting data available for that field, and the setting applies to
all segments.  It will be necessary to regenerate.

Marvin Humphrey

View raw message