Searching Magento with fulltext search engine and like method , it will store results in catalogsearch_fulltext table in "data_index" field where it stores value in the format like
each searchable attribute is separated with |.
e.g
3003|Enabled|None||Product name|1.99|yellow|0
here it store sku,status,tax class, product name , price ,color etc etc
It stores all searchable attribute value.
Now the issue is for Configurable product , it will also store the associated products name ,price ,status in the same field like
3003|Enabled|Enabled|Enabled|Enabled|None|None|None|None|Product name|Product name|associted Product name1|associted Product name2|associted Product name3|1.99|2.00|2.99|3.99|yellow|black|yellow|green|0|0|0|0
So what happen is if i search for any word from associated product, it will also list the main configurable product as it has the word in its "data_index" field.
Need some suggestion how can i avoid associated products being included in data_index, So that i can have perfect search result.
thanks
We are looking into our search as well and it has been surprising to see the inefficiencies included in the fulltext table. We have some configurable products as well that have MANY variations and their population in the fulltext search is downright horrendous.
As for solutions, I can only offer my approach to fix the problem (not completed: but rather in the process).
I am extending Magento to include an event listener to the process of indexing the products (Because catalog search indexing is when the fulltext database is populated). Once that process occurs, I am writing my own module to remove duplicate entries from the associated products and also to add the functionality of adding additional search keyword terms as populated from a CSV file.
This should effectively increase search speed dramatically and also return more relevent search results. Because as of now, configurable products are getting "search bias" in the search results.
This isn't so much of an answer as a comment, but it was too lengthy to fit in the comments but I thought this might be beneficial to you. Once I get my module working, if you would like, I can possibly give you directions on how you could implement a similar module yourself.
Hope that helped (if only for moral support in magento's search struggle)
Related
I'm looking into ArangoSearch for the first time and it looks like a pretty good functionality.
However, in all the tutorials, despite having the ability to tell it to index all fields, one cannot do a 'blind' search across all fields of the document. Like when we look at the example below:
FOR d in myView SEARCH d.text IN ["quick", "brown"] RETURN d
I don't seem to have the ability to just search d entirely without specifying each individual field that I want to include in my search. Is that correct and if so, why is that and are there workarounds? I'm dealing with a lot of different collections with a lot of different fields that can contain a relevant term, it would be a shame if I'd have to tabulate all of them to make an expansive search.
Can someone confirm the behaviour of the Smart search results webpart when using a Smart search filter on a particular field, documentation here, when the index, and the expected results, are compound of multiple page types?
In my scenario I have 2 page types, one is always a child of the other, my hypothetical scenario would be a Folder and File types as an example.
I've configured the index with Pages type and Standard analyzer to include all Folder and File types under the path /MyOS/% on the tree.
The search page, includes the Smart search results webpart and a Smart search filter, a checkbox for the File's field FileIsHidden.
What I'm trying to ascertain is the possibility for the results to include all folders that have a hidden field, as well as the files?
Client has a v8.2 license and now has a requirement similar to this scenario.
Thanks so much for any help in advance.
Firstly what i would do is download the latest version of LUKE, it's a lucene inspector that allows you to run queries, inspect the data, etc.
https://code.google.com/archive/p/luke/downloads
Your search indexes are in the App_Data/Modules/SmartSearch/[SearchName], now i am not sure if LUKE can query 2 indexes as the same time, however you can run hte same query against both and see if it's filtering out results one way or another.
If you are trying to query where a field must be a value, and the other page type does not have the field, it probably is filtered out. What you need to do is use the lucene syntax to say "(classname = 'cms.file' and fileonlyproperty = '' OR classname <> 'cms.file')" so to say.
You'll have to test, but say the class name is cms.file and cms.folder, and the property is FileIsHidden, i think the syntax would be:
+((FieldIsHidden:(true) and classname:('cms.file')) OR (NOT classname:('cms.file'))
But you'll have to test that.
I am using solr for searching. I wants to improve my search result quality based on previously searched terms. Suppose, I have two products in my index with names 'Jewelry Crystal'(say it belongs to Group 1) & 'Compound Crystal'(say it belongs to Group 2). Now, if we query for 'Crystal', then both the products will come.
Let say, if I had previously searched for 'Jewelry Ornament', then I searches for 'Crystal', then I expects that only one result ('Jewelry Crystal') should come. There is no point of showing 'Compound Crystal' product to any person looking for jewelry type product.
Is there any way in SOLR to honour this kind of behavior or is there any other method to achieve this.
First of all, there's nothing built-in in Solr to achive this. What you need for this is some kind of user session, which is not supported by Solr, or a client side storage like a cookie or something for the preceding query.
But to achive the upvote you can use a runtime Boost Query.
Assuming you're using the edismax QueryParser, you can add the following to your Solr query:
q=Crystal&boost=bq:(Jewelry Ornament)
See http://wiki.apache.org/solr/ExtendedDisMax#bq_.28Boost_Query.29
I am using the AdvancedDatabaseCrawler as a base for my search page. I have configured it so that I can search for what I want and it is very fast. The problem is that as soon as you want to do anything with the search results that requires accessing field values the performance goes through the roof.
The main search results part is fine as even if there are 1000 results returned from the search I am only showing 10 or 20 results per page which means I only have to retrieve 10 or 20 items. However in the sidebar I am listing out various filtering options with the number or results associated with each filtering option (eBay style). In order to retrieve these filter options I perform a relationship search based on the search results. Since the search results only contain SkinnyItems it has to call GetItem() on every single result to get the actual item in order to get the value that I'm filtering by. In other words it will call Database.GetItem(id) 1000 times! Obviously that is not terribly efficient.
Am I missing something here? Is there any way to configure Sitecore search to retrieve custom values from the search index? If I can search for the values in the index why can't I also retrieve them? If I can't, how else can I process the results without getting each individual item from the database?
Here is an idea of the functionality that I’m after: http://cameras.shop.ebay.com.au/Digital-Cameras-/31388/i.html
Klaus answered on SDN: use facetting with Apache Solr or similar.
http://sdn.sitecore.net/SDN5/Forum/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=35618
I've currently resolved this by defining dynamic fields for every field that I will need to filter by or return in the search result collection. That way I can achieve the facetted searching that is required without needing to grab field values from the database. I'm assuming that by adding the dynamic fields we are taking a performance hit when rebuilding the index. But I can live with that.
In the future we'll probably look at utilizing a product like Apache Solr.
My indexed documents have a field containing a pipe-delimited set of ids:
a845497737704e8ab439dd410e7f1328|
0a2d7192f75148cca89b6df58fcf2e54|
204fce58c936434598f7bd7eccf11771
(ignore line breaks)
This field represents a list of tags. The list may contain 0 to n tag Ids.
When users of my site view a particular document, I want to display a list of related documents.
This list of related document must be determined by tags:
Only documents with at least one matching tag should appear in the "related documents" list.
Document with the most matching tags should appear at the top of the "related documents" list.
I was thinking of using a WildcardQuery for this but queries starting with '*' are not allowed.
Any suggestions?
Setting aside for a minute the possible uses of Lucene for this task (which I am not overly familiar with) - consider checking out the LinkDatabase.
Sitecore will, behind the scenes, track all your references to and from items. And since your multiple tags are indeed (I assume) selected from a meta hierarchy of tags represented as Sitecore Items somewhere - the LinkDatabase would be able to tell you all items referencing it.
In some sort of pseudo code mockup, this would then become
for each ID in tags
get all documents referencing this tag
for each document found
if master-list contains document; increase usage-count
else; add document to master list
sort master-list by usage-count descending
Forgive me that I am not more precise, but am unavailable to mock up a fully working example right at this stage.
You can find an article about the LinkDatabase here http://larsnielsen.blogspirit.com/tag/XSLT. Be aware that if you're tagging documents using a TreeListEx field, there is a known flaw in earlier versions of Sitecore. Documented here: http://www.cassidy.dk/blog/sitecore/2008/12/treelistex-not-registering-links-in.html
Your pipe-delimited set of ids should really have been separated into individual fields when the documents were indexed. This way, you could simply do a query for the desired tag, sorting by relevance descending.
You can have the same field multiple times in a document. In this case, you would add multiple "tag" fields at index time by splitting on |. Then, when you search, you just have to search on the "tag" field.
Try this query on the tag field.
+(tag1 OR tag2 OR ... tagN)
where tag1, .. tagN are the tags of a document.
This query will return documents with at least one tag match. The scoring automatically will take care to bring up the documents with highest number of matches as the final score is sum of individual scores.
Also, you need to realizes that if you want to find documents similar to tags of Doc1, you will find Doc1 coming at the top of the search results. So, handle this case accordingly.