lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Hostetter <hossman_luc...@fucit.org>
Subject Re: edismax using bigrams instead of phrases?
Date Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:45:47 GMT

: I see that edismax already defines pf (bigrams) and pf3 (trigrams) -- how
: would folks think about just calling them pf / pf1 (aliases for each
: other?), pf2, and pf3? The pf would then behave exactly as it does in
: dismax.

changing edismax's current pasing logic to be applied to a "pf2" param 
and restoring the original "pf" logic certainly makes sense -- but i think 
it would be a mistake to have a "pf1" field that was an alias for "pf" ... 
as it stands the "pf" parm in dismax is analogous to a "pf*" or 
"pf-Infinity" type option requiring all of the words however many tehre 
are ... in the context of "pf2" and "pf3" a "pf1" option would imply that 
it did a phrase boosting on each individual word -- which wouldnt' be very 
useful at all (tht'as what qf is for)



-Hoss


Mime
View raw message