I have started using ThinkingSphinx for text search but can anybody explain me what's the difference between these two way of calling thinkingsphinx search , though I see both returns the same result and working fine in my local system. But does it effect in some other environment like production.??
From the documentation of Thinking Sphinx:
You can use all the same syntax to search across all indexed models in
your application:
ThinkingSphinx.search 'pancakes'
So if you call search on ThinkingSphinx, it searches in all of your indexed models.
Related
Is there any possibility to make a search on two non-complete words in the same field using Elasticsearch in Rails? I mean the situation when I could successfully search for example "victorian buildings" phrase by inserting into search input for example "vict bui" phrase (only beginnings of words, also with fuzziness).
Partial match (word_start, text_start etc. available in Searchkick) doesn't work in this project. I've also tried using wildcard queries, but it also failed. Maybe writing some custom mappings/settings would be a good idea?
Can I ask you for any suggestions on what to search/read to do this task?
Try this example
"%#{params[:place]}%"
Since % is a wildcard, doing a like on '%%' matches everything,
and you get all the records in the result.
I'm trying to fix the Magento search issue where 'OR' is used for comparison of multiple search terms instead of 'AND'.
I've seen quite a number of suggestions on the web regarding how to fix this, and the general idea is as follows:
Copy
app/code/core/Mage/CatalogSearch/Model/resource/Fulltext.php to
app/code/local/Mage/CatalogSearch/Model/resource/Fulltext.php and in the copy, change the instances of 'OR' to 'AND', where the SQL queries are built.
However, my changes don't seem to work as expected and what is even more confusing is that the prepareResult() method (which is where the SQL changes above are made) doesn't even seem to run at all when searches are done. I've tested this by putting some debugging code in the function.
I've used the same debug code to verify that the file gets loaded. But the debug code doesn't run when inserted at the prepareResult() function. (The debug code basically writes to a file on disk).
What am I missing here?
Kindly note that this is not so much about the right way to accomplish the end goal of fixing Magento search. I'm aware it's best done via an extension. I'd just like to figure out why prepareResult() isn't being called as expected.
First, this question - filter design documents from all_docs - already seemed to be solved like described here:
https://plus.google.com/+JasonDeRose/posts/1iP5tu3wVqw
/mydb/_all_docs?endkey=%22_%22
and worked in first place. However, suddenly in a different setup (actually just different deploy), the query only returns an empty collection []. It seems like the ordering changed, without endkey="_" the full collection is returned (including design documents). I tried various combinations of endkey/startkey but cannot achieve to filter the design documents again.
Finally I added a filter and switched to _changes?include_docs=true to load the initial documents. I also thought about defining a view, but don't like that this results in data replication and some inconveniences with the changes feed (needed in another context). The filter on the other hand will be executed for every document.
Is it a bug that endkey=%22_%22 doesn't work anymore and is there a more convenient, still working way?
/_all_docs is a special case for CouchDB. Instead of the normal Unicode Collation, it uses ASCII collation.
The '_' character in ASCII order shows up between uppercase letters and lowercase letters. So if your doc id starts with lowercase letters (default behaviour), they will show up after any design docs. If your doc ids start with uppercase letters, they will show up before design docs.
Try creating a document with an id of: "ABC" You will see it show up before the design doc and your trick to filter design docs would work in this case.
However, I recommend you stop using the `_all_docs view altogether. Instead use the normal view functionality. When you create a view, CouchDB automatically skips design docs for you. So if your view looked like:
function(doc){
emit(doc._id, null);
}
You could query this with no start or end key, and get all docs without design docs.
Also, please look at Unicode Collation order, this is the order all your other views will be in, and it's important to understand as you work with CouchDB. You can read all about it here:
http://docs.couchdb.org/en/stable/ddocs/views/collation.html
I was exploring the documentation and Q&A regarding on how to configure an index in ES. At some point I get really confused. I found two different versions/ways (?) on how to do it, but I can't seem to find what the difference is.
(1) this one: Elasticsearch: Constructing mappings for Java Client which seems to be one yml file that contains all the definitions for the index bookshelf (in the given example)
(2) a definition of a tweet: http://www.elasticsearch.org/guide/reference/mapping/object-type/ (JSON)
to me, (1) seems to be more conclusive. but anyway, what confuses me is that (1) has mappings defined, and (2) has properties - what is the difference? what is the correct/better way of defining fields for types of an index?
They're both kinda the same really. 1. Is just being fed to a client which will eventually just output a JSON file that looks like 2.
The reason 2 looks odd to you is because its documenting/demonstrating a specific type of mapping, not telling you how to create index mappings.
If you're using an elasticsearch client then consult the documentation for how they want you to specify mappings, if you want to interface with elasticsearch using REST commands directly then read this documentation, (read it anyway to understand how to construct mappings in general)
I've been using usenet searches since about 1995 to get programming information, mostly for microsoft APIs. First searching via dejanews, and now google "groups" which bought out dejanews. Over the last few years I've noticed a steady decline in the quantity of search results for usenet from google, and today I find I'm completely unable to get a working usenet search on their advanced group search page. I'm used to searching on "microsoft.*" sometimes suplemented with "microsoft" or "microsoft*". Just try to find a post from 1996-1998 time period on "database" in either the comp.* or microsoft.* hierarchies, and if you can do it, please show your search expression. There should be thousands of results.
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?safe=off&q=database+group%3Amicrosoft*&btnG=Rechercher&as_mind=1&as_minm=1&as_miny=1996&as_maxd=1&as_maxm=1&as_maxy=1999&as_drrb=b&sitesearch=
seems to work nicely... 994 results (no thousands but still...)
It appears to be problem with the advanced search form. I can't get the one at
http://groups.google.fr/advanced_search?hl=fr&q=&hl=fr&
to work either. But I can use the basic form with "database group:microsoft*" and I get many results as expected.
http://www.google.ca/groups/search?safe=off&q=database+group%3Acomp.*&btnG=Search&sitesearch=
returns 3,000 results
The advanced search isn't working for me either:
Broken advanced search results URL
However, removing lr=selected from the query string in that URL makes it work, for some reason:
Working advanced search results URL
In fact, hitting the search button again on the broken advanced search results page will return those results as well for me.
Or actually, it's only partly working, since entering multiple comma-separated groups in the advanced search form (or using the group: search operator) doesn't quite work as expected and ends up adding all the words in the additional group names as search keywords too.
You could try learning Julian dates and use the daterange search operator:
Search results using daterange: