Working on some search queries using searchkick and having trouble figuring out how to set up the searchkick search to get the results i want. So users can save recipes and recipes have tags associated with them. I want to get all the tags from their saved recipes and search for recipes with the same tags and weight the tags based on how many times they appear.
So to get the tags I can do this:
tags = Tagging.where(taggable_id: current_user.saved_recipes.pluck(:recipe_id)).group(:tag_id).count
This returns something like this:
{23=>1, 56=>1, 27=>2, 30=>1, 28=>1, 36=>1, 39=>1, 16=>1}
Im just not sure how to pass that array to weight the numbers, so in that case tag 27 would have a higher weight then the rest. The field Im searching against in my elasticsearch index is :tags.
Recipe.search "*", where: [tags: tag]
This was what I was thinking but the hash of tags has those numbers and not sure how to make that boost the results. Hope this is clear
You could try using the boost_where option, which allows you to boost results by a different factor for different values.
Specifically, in your case, you could try:
tags = Tagging.where(taggable_id: current_user.saved_recipes.pluck(:recipe_id)).group(:tag_id).count
# Boost any tags with count greater than 1
boost_values = tags.select { |k, v| v > 1 }.map { |k,v| {value: k, factor: v * 10} }
Recipe.search "*", where: [tags: tag], boost_where: {tags: boost_values}
Related
Im using SearchKick which is great, Im migrating from a really bad search implementation and the product team didn't give me much trust as such before migrating to SearchKick and doing an overhaul to our search, they made me add hardcoded query results, so they can say for this search input I want this product to come up first. right now Im taking the query results that answer a certain the requested query from the db and add them at the top ( I don't care if you want the result at position 48, if there are 4 hard coded results it will be the 4th). although if possible it would be nice to do put them in the middle.
What is the cleanest way to do it with SearchKick, so that the querying will happen inside elastic ( index the hardcoded results in the product to do so )
I have 2 models Product and QueryResult, QueryResult contains a product, a query string & a wanted_rank
in my Product model I do have a method to get search results that looks something like this:
def get_search_results(query_string)
# get search results from elastic using searchkick
search_results = Product.search(query_string)
# get hardcoded results matching this query
hardcoded_results = QueryResults.where(query: query).order(:wanted_rank).map(&:product)
# remove hardcoded results from search_results
search_results = search_results - hardcoded_results
# return results where hardcoded results are first
hardcoded_results + search_results
end
In the end I want all the search logic to happen over elastic including inserting hardcoded search results
So after some very helpful comments and more search I found a solution.
first of all my first mistake was to try to fix it using boosts instead of order, to do so we index all QueryResults of a specific product under a field called called query_results.
for a product x with query results:
{
query: 'foo',
wanted_rank: 1,
},
{
query: 'bar',
wanted_rank: 2,
}
I will index:
{
name: 'x',
query_results: {
'foo': 1,
'bar': 2
}
}
than when searching, given a attribute named query, I will do as follow:
Product.search(
query,
order: [
{ "query_results.#{query}": { unmapped_type: :long },
{ _score: :desc }
]
)
2 important things to notice:
use unmapped_type this will tell elastic what mapping to use when there is no mapping, each random query that does not have a query result ( which is most of them ) will have no mapping for "query_results.#{query}" because it wont be indexed, as such we add unmapped_type to tell elastic if you have no mapping act like its long.
both when searching and when saving the db I downcase and strip query so it will match properly.
also I index the queries under another field and do a search over it with low weight to make sure that the product will come up for that query.
In a rails 4 app, in one model I have a column containing multiple ids as a string with comma separated values.
"123,4568,12"
I have a "search" engine that I use to retrieve the records with one or many values using the full text search of postgresql I can do something like this which is very useful:
records = MyModel.where("my_models.col_name ## ?", ["12","234"])
This return all the records that have both 12 and 234 in the targeted column. The array comes from a form with a multiple select.
Now I'm trying to make a query that will find all the records that have either 12 or 234 in there string.
I was hopping to be able to do something like:
records = MyModel.where("my_models.col_name IN (?)", ["12","234"])
But it's not working.
Should I iterate through all the values in the array to build a query with multiple OR ? Is there something more appropriate to do this?
EDIT / TL;DR
#BoraMa answer is a good way to achieve this.
To find all the records containing one or more ids referenced in the request use:
records = MyModel.where("my_models.col_name ## to_tsquery(?)", ["12","234"].join('|'))
You need the to_tsquery(?) and the join with a single pipe |to do a OR like query.
To find all the records containing exactly all the ids in the query use:
records = MyModel.where("my_models.col_name ## ?", ["12","234"])
And of course replace ["12","234"] with something like params[:params_from_my_form]
Postgres documentation for full text search
If you already started to use the fulltext search in Postgres in the first place,I'd try to leverage it again. I think you can use a fulltext OR query which can be constructed like this:
records = MyModel.where("my_models.col_name ## to_tsquery(?)", ["12","234"].join(" | "));
This uses the | operator for ORing fulltext queries in Postgres. I have not tested this and maybe you'll need to do to_tsvector('my_models.col_name') for this to work.
See the documentation for more info.
Suppose your ids are :
a="1,2,3,4"
You can simply use:
ModelName.find(a)
This will give you all the record of that model whose id is present in a.
I just think a super simple solution, we just sort the ids in saving callback of MyModel, then the query must be easier:
class MyModel < ActiveRecord::Base
before_save :sort_ids_in_col_name, if: :col_name_changed?
private
def sort_ids_in_col_name
self.col_name = self.col_name.to_s.split(',').sort.join(',')
end
end
Then the query will be easy:
ids = ["12","234"]
records = MyModel.where(col_name: ids.sort.join(',')
I'm having a huge array of Hashes. Each Hash a detail about a company. When i search within this Array of Hashes. it is extremely slow. How i can improve its performance?
I'm using Select method with conditions to get the different companies based on status, and division like
companies.count { |company| company.sectors.include?('educational') && company.status == 'completed' }
What is the best way to search from a huge hashes of arrays using ruby on rails ?
use SQL:
Company.where('selector like ? AND status = ?', '%educational%', 'completed').count
but you can use first for find companies
#companies = Company.includes(:my_associations).where(...)
than my sample .where('selector like ? AND......
I'm building a summary of data based on multiple entities - to keep things simple for eg. a list of categories and the number of items present in each category returned as json e.g.
{"report":["Fruit",35]}
#array = []
#active_rec = Category.all
#array = #active_rec.collect{ |u| [u.name, ?how to insert AR query result? }
How can I plug a value along with the name that is the result of another query eg. is it possible to perform a query inline on a current row ?
Thanks!
Made some assumptions about your date model:
Fruit.joins(:category).group('categories.id').select('categories.name, COUNT(fruits.id)')
Or (depending on how you want to handle the case of duplicate category names):
Fruit.joins(:category).group('categories.name').count('fruits.id')
Note the output will be in a different format depending on which of these you choose.
I'm having trouble figuring out how to loop over the results of a ThinkingSphinx search that has been set to group_by. I currently have the following:
search = Event.search(
{
group_by: 'category_id',
group_function: :attr
}
)
search.each_with_groupby_and_count do |event, group, count|
puts [event, group, count].join(' - ')
end
This, however, only returns one record per category. It seems like the group and count values are correct, but I only get the first Event of each category, which I would have expected to be all the events in the group. Is it possible to get an array of Hashes or similar? Furthermore, if this is possible, would the per_page option be per group?
I would expect each_with_group_and_count to iterate over something like this:
[
{group: 1, hits: [Event1, Event2], count: 2},
{group: 2: hits: [Event3], count: 1}
]
I'm afraid Sphinx's grouping functionality doesn't behave in that matter - it only returns one document (in this situation, one event) per group value.
It may be more appropriate to just sort by category_id instead, and track when it changes as you iterate over it (or use Enumerable#group_by to group all events by category_id) - keep in mind that Sphinx paginates results, so you may want to increase the default page size (with :per_page) depending on how you're using these results.