I'm using yii\elasticsearch\Query, and I want to use the script based sorting, as described here. I do not see any possibility with Yii.
I can not define the field at the indexing, because I have to sort by the sum of 2 or more fields. Which fields are involved in the sorting is dynamic.
I've tried to define a script field on the fly, what is allowed by Yii:
$query->fields = array_merge($allFields, [
'rda_sum' => "doc['nutrient_220_rda_rate'].value + doc['nutrient_221_rda_rate'].value",
]);
But unfortunately the script field can not be used in the orderBy method. I get the the error message:
No mapping found for [rda_sum] in order to sort on
Any idea?
I think your best solution would be to apply it as a score rather than a calculated field.
https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/query-dsl-function-score-query.html
And if you need to the opposite order, multiply the result of your score calculation by -1
Related
i'm facing a big problem in my SolR DB.
My objects have a datetime field "Available_From" and a datetime field "Available_To".
We also have a "Ranking" field for the sorting.
I can search correctly with direct queries (eg. give me all the items that are available at the moment) but when i do a regular search i cannot find a way to show the items that result "available NOW" in the first places in the results, usually sorted by "Ranking" field.
How can i do this? Am I forced to write some java classes (the nearest thing i've found is there https://medium.com/#devchaitu18/sorting-based-on-a-custom-function-in-solr-c94ddae99a12) or is there a way to do with standard SolR queries?
Thanks in advance to everyone!
In your case you actually don't want sorting, since that indicates that you want one field to determine the returned sequence of documents.
Instead, use boosting - apply a very large boost to those that are available now, either through bq or boost, then apply a boost based on ranking. You'll have to tweak the weights given to each part based on how you want the search results to be presented.
I have a status field in my elastic search index which can take values Open,Closed,Clear,Intermediate,Ready for Approval. Right now, I have created a visualization and sorted this field descending based on the Term. What I want to achieve is - I want this to be sorted in this particular order Open,Clear,Intermediate,Ready for Approval,Closed.
How do I achieve this? One option I am thinking is creating a scripted field and prefixing with integer column, but I am not sure if I will be able to filter the visualization later?
If this list of possible values is a static list of known values, there is another way to define your visualization with a little more manual configuration. Just replace your terms aggregation with a filters aggregation and add custom filters for the possible values like so:
Kibana will respect the order of your filters in the visualization. From a performance perspective, this should also be better than using a scripted field...
Search query which I send to SOLR is:
?q=iphone 4s&sort=sold desc
By default the search works great, but the problem appears when I want to
sort results by some field for eg. sold - No. of sold products.
SOLR finds all the results which have: (iphone 4s) or (iphone) or (4s)
So, when I apply sort by field 'sold' first result is: "iPhone 3GS..." which is problem.
I need the results by phrase ("iphone 4s") first and then the rest of the results - all sorted by sold.
So, the questions are:
Is it possible to have query like this, and how?
q=iphone 4s&sort={some algoritam for phrase results first} desc, sold desc
Or, can I perform this by setting up query analyzer and how?
At the moment this is solved by sending 2 requests to SOLR,
first with phrase "iphone 4s" and, if this returns 0 results,
I perform second request without the phrase - only: iphone 4s.
If sorting by score, id, field is not sufficient, Lucene lets you implement custom sorting mechanism by providing your own subclass of FieldComparatorSource abstract base class.
With in that custom-sort-logic, you can implement the way that realizes your requirements.
Example Java code:
If(modelNum1.equals(modelNum2)){
//return based on number of units sold.
}else{
//ALWAYS return a value such that the preferred model beats others.
}
DISCLAIMER: This may lead to maintenance problems as you will have to change the logic when a new phone model arrives.
Steps:
1) Sort object accepts FieldComparatorSource type instance during instantiation.
2) Extend the FieldComparatorSource
3) You've to load the required field information that participates in 'SORTING' using FieldCache within the FieldComparatorSource in setNextReader()
4) Override the FieldComparatorSource.newComparator() to return your custom FieldComparator.
5) In the method FieldComparator.compare(slot1DocId, slot2DocId), you may include your custom logic by accessing the corresponding field information, via loaded FieldCache, using the docIds passed in.
Incorporating Lucene code into Solr as a plug-in should not trouble you..
EDIT:
Can not use space in that function. Term is only without space.
As of Solr3.1, sorting can also be done on arbitrary function queries
(as in FunctionQuery) that produce a single value per document.
So, I will use function termfreq in sort
termfreq(field,term) returns the number of times the term appears in
the field for that document.
Search query will be
q=iphone 4s&sort=termfreq(product_name,"iphone 4s") desc, sold desc
Note: The function termfreq is active from Solr 4.0 version
We're running Solr 3.6 and are trying to apply a conditional sort on the result set. To clarify, the data is a set of bids, and we want to add the option to sort by the current user's bid, so it can't function as a regular sort (as the bid will be different for each user that runs the query).
The documents in the result set include a "CurrentUserId" and "CurrentBid" field, so I think we need something like the following to sort:
sort=((CurrentUserId = 12345) ? CurrentBid : 0) desc
This is just pseudocode, but the idea is that if the currentUserId in Solr matches the user Id (12345 in this example), then sort by CurrentBid, otherwise, just use 0.
It seems like doing a sort by query might be the way to go with achieving this (or at least form part of the solution), using something like the following query:
http://localhost:8080/solr/select/?q=:&sort=query(CurrentUserId:10330 AND CurrentBid:[1 TO *])+desc
This doesn't seem to be working for me though, and results in the following error:
sort param could not be parsed as a query, and is not a field that exists in the index: ...
The Solr documentation indicates that the query function can be used as a sort parameter from Solr 1.4 onwards, so this seems like it should work.
Any advice on how to go about achieving this would be greatly appreciated.
According to the Solr Documentation link you provided,
Any type of subquery is supported through either parameter dereferencing $otherparam or direct specification of the query string in the LocalParams via "v".
So based on the examples and your query, I think one or both of the following should work:
http://localhost:8080/solr/select/?q=:&sort=query($qq)+desc&qq=(CurrentUserId:10330 AND CurrentBid:[1 TO *])
http://localhost:8080/solr/select/?q=:&sort=query({v='CurrentUserId:10330 AND CurrentBid:[1 TO *]'})+desc
I've got an Entity model (in Mongoid) that I'm trying to search on its keywords field which is an array. I want to do a query where I pass in an array of potential search terms, and any entity that matches any of the terms will pass.
I don't have this working well yet.
But, why I'm asking this question, is that it's more complex. I also DONT want to return any entities that have been marked as "do not return" which I do via a "ignore_project_ids" parameter.
So, when I query, I get 0 results. I was using Bonsai.io. But, I've moved this to my own EC2 instance to reduce complexity/variables on solving the problem.
So, what am I doing wrong? Here are the relevant bits of code.
https://gist.github.com/3405763
You want a terms query rather than a term query - a term query is only interested in equality, whereas a terms query requires that the field match any of the specified values.
Given that you don't seem to care about the query score (you're sorting by another attribute), you'll get faster queries by using a filtered query and expressing your conditions as filters