sample:
...
<PEOPLE>
<PERSON>JOHN, the fighter<PERSON/>
<PERSON>SALLY, the visionary<PERSON/>
<PGROUP>
<PERSON>YOYO<PERSON/>
<PERSON>BENJI<PERSON/>
</PGROUP>
<PERSON>builders<PERSON/>
<PERSON>cleaners<PERSON/>
<PGROUP>
<PERSON>Clowny, good person<PERSON/>
<PERSON>Clownee, bad person<PERSON/>
</PGROUP>
<PERSON>Gentleman<PERSON/>
</PEOPLE>
...
I want to plug in a string and find that person (if exists):
John,
builder,
clown (should return the first occurrence => Clowny, good person),
fighter,
...
I have tried these things but none seem to give me a result or a result i want:
//PERSON will select all the persons; contains(Person,'"+searchStr+"'); //PERSON[1] will select 3 persons; //PERSON[PERSON='YOYO'] doesnt work
none of these have worked so far. I want the full name to be returned.
EDIT:
This returns 1 if the searchStr is found (input is exact). without count it returns PEOPLE. Appending the expression with /PERSON always returns the first person if the person searched for was found.
count(//PEOPLE[//PERSON="Clowny, good person"])
I am going to leave this question up if somebody needs it in the future.
The right approach is to look for the text()
//PERSON[contains(text(),"vision")]/text()
Selecting the PERSON where the PERSON's text() contains the searchStr then return it's text()
Related
I have a query that when given a word that starts with a one-letter word followed by space character and then another word (ex: "T Distribution"), does not return results. While given "Distribution" alone returns results including the results for "T Distribution". It is the same behavior with all search terms beginning with a one-letter word followed by space character and then another word.
The problem appears when the search term is of this pattern:
"[one-letter][space][letter/word]". example: "o ring".
What would be the problem that the LIKE operator not working correctly in this case?
Here is my query:
#Cacheable(value = "filteredConcept")
#Query("SELECT NEW sina.backend.data.model.ConceptSummaryVer04(s.id, s.arabicGloss, s.englishGloss, s.example, s.dataSourceId,
s.synsetFrequnecy, s.arabicWordsCache, s.englishWordsCache, s.superId, s.categoryId, s.dataSourceCacheAr, s.dataSourceCacheEn,
s.superTypeCasheAr, s.superTypeCasheEn, s.area, s.era, s.rank, s.undiacritizedArabicWordsCache, s.normalizedEnglishWordsCache,
s.isTranslation, s.isGloss, s.arabicSynonymsCount, s.englishSynonymsCount) FROM Concept s
where s.undiacritizedArabicWordsCache LIKE %:searchTerm% AND data_source_id != 200 AND data_source_id != 31")
List<ConceptSummaryVer04> findByArabicWordsCacheAndNotConcept(#Param("searchTerm") String searchTerm, Sort sort);
the result of the query on the database itself:
link to screenshot
results on the database are returned no matter the letters case:
link to screenshot
I solved this problem.
It was due to the default configuration of the Full-text index on mysql database which is by default set to 2 (ft_min_word_len = 2).
I changed that and rebuilt the index. Then, one-letter words were returned by the query.
12.9.6 Fine-Tuning MySQL Full-Text Search
Use some quotes:
LIKE '%:searchTerm%';
Set searchTerm="%your_word%" and use it on query like this :
... s.undiacritizedArabicWordsCache LIKE :searchTerm ...
I have User model with Name and Surname properties, and I need query to search by name.
This code is now:
query
.beginGroup()
.contains("name", search, Case.INSENSITIVE)
.or()
.contains("surname", search, Case.INSENSITIVE)
.endGroup()
.findAll();
But, if i want to search Jerry Smith, i'll write "jerry smi" and won't get what i want, obviously because there's or. How should i do this?
I'm going to create and maintain fullname field, setting it on setters of name/surname and search by it, is it good path?
The easiest way would be to add a third field called "full name" where you put name + surname. Then you'd only search like this:
query.contains("full name", search, Case.INSENSITIVE).findAll();
RealmResults<Event> toEdit = realm.where(Event.class)
.equalTo("name", day)
.equalTo("surname", month)
.findAll();
Hope this will help ! Cheers !
Maybe I'm really missing something.
I have indexed a bunch of key/value pairs in Lucene (v4.1 if it matters). Say I have
key1=value1 and key2=value2, e.g. as read from a properties file.
They get indexed both as specific fields and into a catchall "ALL" field, e.g.
new Field("key1", "value1", aFieldTypeMimickingKeywords);
new Field("key2", "value2", aFieldTypeMimickingKeywords);
new Field("ALL", "key1=value1", aFieldTypeMimickingKeywords);
new Field("ALL", "key2=value2", aFieldTypeMimickingKeywords);
// then get added to the Document of course...
I can then do a wildcard search, using
new WildcardQuery(new Term("ALL", "*alue1"));
and it will find the hit.
But, it would be nice to get more info, like "what was complete value (e.g. "key1=value1") that goes with that hit?".
The best I can figure out it to get the Document, then get the list of IndexableFields, then loop over all of them and see if the field.stringValue().contains("alue1"). (I can look at the data structures in the debugger and all the info is there)
This seems completely insane cause isn't that what Lucene just did? Shouldn't the Hit information return some of the Fields?
Is Lucene missing what seems like "obvious" functionality? Google and starting at the APIs hasn't revealed anything straightforward, but I feel like I must be searching on the wrong stuff.
You might want to try with IndexSearcher.explain() method. Once you get the ID of the matching document, prepare a query for each field (using the same search keywords) and invoke Explanation.isMatch() for each query: the ones that yield true will give you the matched field. Example:
for (String field: fields){
Query query = new WildcardQuery(new Term(field, "*alue1"));
Explanation ex = searcher.explain(query, docID);
if (ex.isMatch()){
//Your query matched field
}
}
I am using a custom score query with a multiMatchQuery. Ultimately what I want is simple and requires little explaination. In my Java Custom Score Script, I want to be able to find out which field a result matched to.
Example:
If I search Starbucks and a result comes back with the name Starbucks then I want to be able to know that name.basic was the field that matched my query. If I search for coffee and starbucks comes back I want to be able to know that tags was the field that matched.
Is there anyway to do this?
Search Query Code:
def basicSearchableSearch(t: String, lat: Double, lon: Double, r: Double, z: Int, bb: BoundingBox, max: Int): SearchResponse = {
val multiQuery = filteredQuery(
multiMatchQuery(t)
//Matches businesses and POIs
.field("name.basic").operator(Operator.OR)
.field("name.no_space")
//Businesses only
.field("tags").boost(6f),
geoBoundingBoxFilter("location")
.bottomRight(bb.botRight.y,bb.botRight.x)
.topLeft(bb.topLeft.y,bb.topLeft.x)
)
val customQuery = customScoreQuery(
multiQuery
)
.script("customJavaScript")
.lang("native")
.param("lat",lat)
.param("lon",lon)
.param("zoom",z)
global.Global.getClient().prepareSearch("searchable")
.setSearchType(SearchType.DFS_QUERY_THEN_FETCH)
.setQuery(customQuery)
.setFrom(0).setSize(max)
.execute()
.actionGet();
}
It's only simple for simple queries. On complex queries, the question which field matched is actually quite nontrivial. So, I cannot think of any efficient way to do it.
Perhaps, you could consider moving your custom score calculation closer to the match. The multi_match query is basically a shortcut for a set of match queries on the same query string combined by a dis_max query. So, you are currently building something like this:
custom_score(
filtered(
dis_max(match_1, match_2, match_3)
)
)
What you can do is to move your custom_score under dis_max and build something like this:
filtered(
dis_max(
custom_score_1(match_1),
custom_score_2(match_2),
custom_score_3(match_3)
)
)
Obviously, this will be a somewhat different query, since dis_max will operate on custom score instead of original score.
Im new to this so here goes.
Trying to get a user called "Bob" from the MongoDb.
I have the:
UserData ud = MonConMan.instance().getDb().find(UserData.class, "name","bob").get();
The "bob" cannot be found if it has capital "Bob".
I understand i can get a List and do equalsIgnoreCase but are
there some Operators i can use?
I have users logging on and must test to see if they are registered. A user can type his name anyway he likes so must find a way to equalsIgnoreCase. Yea this is a problem, i cannot get all names and do equalsIgnoreCase, if there are like 10,000. One could of course initially save all user names in lowercase but that would destroy the visual appearance of the name.
looking at the wiki but cannot see any..
http://code.google.com/p/morphia/wiki/Query
Use java regex, like this.
String name = "bob";
Pattern pattern = Pattern.compile("^" + bob + "$", Pattern.CASE_INSENSITIVE);//This line will create a pattern to match words starts with "b", ends with "b" and its case insensitive too.
Query<UserData> query = createQuery().field("name").equal(pattern).retrievedFields(true, "id");//Replace `id` with what ever name you use in UserData for '_id'
UserData user = query.get();
if(user!=null){
//he is already registered
}
else{
//He is a new guy
}
(I am not good at regex, so you may have read about$&^somewhere. )
You should be sure that the user names you are using to validate a new user should be unique across your system.
Ended up keeping two fields like
- lowercaseusername
- originalusername
This way i could search for a user using the lowercaseusername
You can make find a name of a UserData using this code :
Query<UserData> query = createQuery().filter("name","bob");
find(query);
In my application, this code return all UserData that haves a field name with "bob" value.
The code can be this way too :
Query<UserData> query = createQuery().field("name").equal("bob");
find(query);
These codes will be in a UserDataDao that extends BasicDao, and receives in the construtor the datastore from morphia.