Solr
  1. Solr
  2. SOLR-2988

edismax does not respect pf params using non-tokenized fields

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Open
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: 3.5
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: query parsers
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      for reasons i don't fully understand, edismax ignores fields in the pf param if those fields are non-tokenized.

      Consider this example dismax query in Solr 3.5...

      http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?debugQuery=true&defType=dismax&qf=name^5+features^3&pf=features^2+cat^4&q=hard+drive
      <str name="parsedquery">
        +((DisjunctionMaxQuery((features:hard^3.0 | name:hard^5.0))
           DisjunctionMaxQuery((features:drive^3.0 | name:drive^5.0))
          )~2)
         DisjunctionMaxQuery((features:"hard drive"^2.0 | cat:hard drive^4.0))
      

      ...compared to the equivalent edismax query...

      http://localhost:8983/solr/select/?debugQuery=true&defType=edismax&qf=name^5+features^3&pf=features^2+cat^4&q=hard+drive
      <str name="parsedquery">
        +((DisjunctionMaxQuery((features:hard^3.0 | name:hard^5.0))
           DisjunctionMaxQuery((features:drive^3.0 | name:drive^5.0))
          )~2)
         DisjunctionMaxQuery((features:"hard drive"^2.0))
      

        Activity

        Show
        Hoss Man added a comment - Initial user report... https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-solr-user/201112.mbox/%3C1323980729630-3589763.post@n3.nabble.com%3E
        Hide
        Jan Høydahl added a comment -

        I've been puzzled by this myself, but thought that it was because a non-tokenized string is per definition one token and thus not a "phrase" but a word But since this worked with "dismax" it now looks more like a bug?

        Show
        Jan Høydahl added a comment - I've been puzzled by this myself, but thought that it was because a non-tokenized string is per definition one token and thus not a "phrase" but a word But since this worked with "dismax" it now looks more like a bug?
        Hide
        Faviann Di Tullio added a comment -

        I've stumbled on this bug too. Is there a technical reason why this issue has not been looked into or its simply lack of manpower?

        Show
        Faviann Di Tullio added a comment - I've stumbled on this bug too. Is there a technical reason why this issue has not been looked into or its simply lack of manpower?
        Hide
        Erick Erickson added a comment -

        As far as I know, just a lack of manpower. Which really translates as nobody who really wants to dive into the code has had a compelling reason to fix it. What often happens is people find a way to work around the issue and declare victory.....

        Show
        Erick Erickson added a comment - As far as I know, just a lack of manpower. Which really translates as nobody who really wants to dive into the code has had a compelling reason to fix it. What often happens is people find a way to work around the issue and declare victory.....

          People

          • Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            Hoss Man
          • Votes:
            4 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            4 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:

              Development