For example, if we have category facet and it returns withe 5 different categories, on clicking of the first category, the other categories will not be available in the response. I want to implement multiple facet search.
Appreciate your response.
For more info, i am referring the same scenario as below:
https://feedback.azure.com/forums/263029-azure-search/suggestions/7762452-provide-multiselect-facets
The facet in the response is limited to the selected and this feature is not supported. I'd suggest to vote for it here https://feedback.azure.com/forums/263029-azure-search/suggestions/7762452-provide-multiselect-facets
A workaround is to send multiple queries to get facets and filtered results separately.
For example,
1. keep all facets in the UI (or make another query to get all facets) after the first search query; 2. make another search query after another facet is selected provided that the application tracks what facets the user has selected.
if you want to filter results with multiple facets , you can modify your filter as below :
$filter = search.in(country, 'USA,Canada,Mexico,Brasil,Chile,Argentina', ',')
The first parameter to the search.in function is the string field reference (or a range variable over a string collection field in the case where search.in is used inside an any or all expression). The second parameter is a string containing the list of values, separated by spaces and/or commas. If you need to use separators other than spaces and commas because your values include those characters, you can specify an optional third parameter to search.in.
This third parameter is a string where each character of the string, or subset of this string is treated as a separator when parsing the list of values in the second parameter.
For more information about OData expression syntax for filters and order-by clauses in Azure Search, please refer to this tutorial.
I've recently run into this limitation and my workaround was to run a separate query for each facet as suggested by #rudin above.
Let's say for example that your application has facets for Colour, Brand and Size. Your primary search query includes all three filters but doesn't return any facets. You then run an additional query ignoring any selected Colours, which will give you all available colour values for the chosen brands and sizes, and you do the same for the brand and size facets.
For the additional queries it's important to set the 'Size' property to 0 so no search results are returned - just the relevant facet.
By doing this and running these queries asynchronously the performance overhead is minimal in my case with 6 facets.
Related
We need two different types of search (based on user input), partial and exact for few fields that we have and for the same requirement, we require two different analyzers for each field to produce the required output.
Now, the problem is, I'm not able to configure 2 analyzers for a single field. The only option for me is to create two different indexes altogether and then query respective index based on the user input, but clearly, this is not the right solution, it is not scalable, mostly redundant data and takes almost double the space.
I'm trying to create a duplicate field in the same index with different analyzers and use the output of them based on the user input, but I'm not sure how I can configure that in the index. The name of the field is what is used to search for, during query time. Is there a possibility for me to have 2 different fields with different names, which actually point to one field but have different analyzers?
You can have 2 different fields with different names, which actually point to one field with two different analyzers. This can be done using field mappings in indexer definition.
I have created index as shown below,
As highlighted in above screen shot, I have taken two new fields with name cont01 and cont02.
These two new fields will point to field merged_content with two different analyzers.
In indexer definition I have configured field mappings as shown below,
Ran indexer and results are as shown below,
Reference link
I have a document which has title, stockCode, category fields.
I have different field types (and analysis chains) for each. For instance title has EdgeNGram 2 to 20, category has EdgeNGram 3 to 10 with different range and stockCode just has lowercase filter.
So that, I don't want to search from documents with keyword "sample" with building the query like title:sample OR stockCode:sample OR category:sample.
I'd like to search with just "q=sample".
I copied my fields to text but It does not work. Because all fields analyzed as same. But I don't want to index stockCode as EdgeNGram or any other filters. I'd like to index my fields as I configured and I'd like to search a keyword over them base on my indexes.
I've been researching about that for three days, and Solr has a little bit poor documentation.
You can use the edismax handler, as this will allow you to give a list of fields to query and supply the query by itself. You can also give separate weights to each field for scoring them differently.
defType=edismax&q=sample&qf=title^10 stockCode category
.. will search for sample in each of the three fields, giving a 10x boost to any hits in the title field.
You can find the documentation about the edismax query parser under Searching in the reference guide.
I'm trying to query cosmosDB where would like to search the first name with SQL 'like' feature, also for case insensitivity i'm using cosmos DBs' 'lower' function.
e.g. SELECT * FROM c where contains (lower(c.lastName), "abc")) // Request Charge = 1660+
I observed Request Charge for this query is around 1660+ but when I use normal query without 'Contains' and 'lower' function the Request Charge is just '8'
e.g. SELECT * FROM c where c.lastName = "abc" // Request Charge = 8
Please help to understand what's causing the huge difference in Request Charge?
The first query with contains is effectively doing a freetext search and will have to scan all documents.
The second query is using an exact match and thus will just use an index and cost less.
And to besides the cost of the actual query path the result set of the first query could be much greater than the second as the second is always contained within the first but the first could match many more, e.g. abcd, cabcd.
If you're looking to search across a lot of text columns then it is worth looking at one of two options.
If you are searching for whole words and the columns are not too
long then you could tokenize the columns into matching fields
The more robust option would be to look at using Azure search in
combination with Cosmos DB
This advice is from the azure blog
Can we specify order of columns to be searched in solr?
For example my search string is : "Test"
Then my result should contain all rows matching column1 and then all rows matching column 2... Similar to union query in SQL.
I tried with custom search handler which will fire multiple requests to solr and then append to get final result.
But is there any other way to get this type of search using SOLR?
I am using solr-5.4.1.
Thanks
You could use eDismax and match on both fields (I assume you mean columns by that). Then, use boosting to prioritize the matches in the first field to rank higher.
As an easy example, you would search against field1^10 field2, where ^10 is the boost factor. If that works but is not perfect, you can look into the documentation for other methods to apply boost.
I have a solr field which has a set of values. Is it possible in solr to return results that are varied based on that field.
Eg: My field contains "ValueA","ValueB" and "ValueC". So if rows is set to 3 then instead of returning all results from "ValueA" it should give me one from each field value (Considering they have the same scores)
You might want to use the Result Grouping / Field Collapsing
or the CollapsingQParserPlugin.
The CollapsingQParserPlugin is newer (since Solr 4.6), faster and more appropriate for your problem, I guess, as it does not effect the structure of the results.
Just add this to your solrconfig.xml:
<queryParser name="collapse" class="org.apache.solr.search.CollapsingQParserPlugin"/>
You can then collapse your result by adding the following parameter to your query:
fq={!collapse field=my_field}
or in Solrj:
solrQuery.addFilterQuery("{!collapse field=my_field}");
Collapsing means: For each value in my_field it only retains the document with the highest score in the result set.