DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31841] - [PATCH] MultiSearcher problems with Similarity.docFreq()

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 31841] - [PATCH] MultiSearcher problems with Similarity.docFreq()

Bugzilla from bugzilla@apache.org
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG?
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31841>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND?
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31841





------- Additional Comments From [hidden email]  2005-06-21 23:08 -------
There might be one corner case that your change in equals doesn't get right
(not tested): a query "a b a" (i.e. one clause occuring twice -- doesn't make
much sense, but has an influence on the result order) would equal "a b b",
wouldn't it? Is that a problem?
 

--
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

BooleanQuery Semantics (was: [Bug 31841] - [PATCH] MultiSearcher...)

Wolf Siberski
[hidden email] wrote:
>
> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31841
>
> ------- Additional Comments From [hidden email]  2005-06-21 23:08 -------
> There might be one corner case that your change in equals doesn't get right
> (not tested): a query "a b a" (i.e. one clause occuring twice -- doesn't make
> much sense, but has an influence on the result order) would equal "a b b",
> wouldn't it? Is that a problem?  

Maybe naively, I assumed that BooleanQuery just follows the classical
boolean logic approach. Then "a b a" and "a b b" should yield exactly
the same result. On the other hand, I can follow your reasoning that
the current implementation will compute different scores for these queries.

So the question is: Which one is the *intended* semantics of BooleanQuery?

Depending on the answer, either my change to BooleanQuery.equals() shouldn't
be applied, or BooleanQuery needs to be fixed in another way, e.g. by
removing duplicate clauses in BooleanQuery.rewrite().


--Wolf


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]