Too many results for an AND search?

Hello, @rfischmann

Well, as I can see, all the search result items in your example page contain the phrase “Pixelmator Pro” so results looks valid. You could add one more word to reduce the number of results. Could you try that?

Also please check the plugin list whether you have any other search-related plugin(s) enabled? Try to disable them, very often there are conflicts between plugins that perform the same functions.

Thanks!

Yeah, the results are very good, @epsiloncool, but I wonder why there are so many — probably because the word “Pro” is very common, and it’s not using the AND operator? Is it because it’s just a 3-character word?

Tried another different one: https://macmagazine.com.br/?s=Pixelmator+Pro+AVIF

Maybe this explains a bit more. There’s just one post with those 3 words, and it’s at the top, but it still shows others below it and it informs us that “AVIF” isn’t found in them. Can I disable that feature somewhere?

Thank you!

Hi, Rafael,

Okay, let’s check some debug information that may help me to understand the problem. Please open WPFTS Settings, then go to the Sandbox and switch to the Test Search tab. Enter “Pixelmator Pro AVIF” to the input box and press “Test” button. Then open your browser’s debug console window and find this text in the console: [{…}]

Click on it right mouse button and Copy Object. This should look like this:
https://e-wm.org/i/E20231215-152412-001.png

Then Paste this text in your next message here, it will look like this:
https://e-wm.org/i/E20231215-152630-001.png

I will check this object and possible can say you what’s going wrong. Thanks!

Thank you! Here you go:

{
  "where": " and (((1))) and (wpftsi_t.relev > 0) AND wp_posts.post_type IN ('post', 'page', 'attachment') AND ((wp_posts.post_status <> 'trash' AND wp_posts.post_status <> 'auto-draft'))",
  "groupby": "",
  "join": "\r\n\t\t\t\t\tinner join ( \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\tselect \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfi.tid, \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tt_end.relev \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\tfrom wpftsi_index fi \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\tstraight_join ( \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tselect \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ttbase.index_id, \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tsum((trel.pow + (trel.res / LOG(tbase.n + 1)) / 4342.944819032517) *  (case tbase.token  when \"post_title\" then 0.8 when \"post_content\" then 0.5 else 1 end) / (10)) relev\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tfrom wpftsi_tp trel\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tstraight_join wpftsi_docs tbase\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ton (trel.did = tbase.id) and (trel.q_id = \"26229\")\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tgroup by tbase.index_id \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\torder by NULL \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t) t_end \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\ton t_end.index_id = fi.id \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\torder by null\r\n\t\t\t\t\t) wpftsi_t \r\n\t\t\t\t\t\ton wpftsi_t.tid = wp_posts.ID \r\n\t\t\t\t\t ",
  "orderby": " (wpftsi_t.relev) DESC, wp_posts.post_date DESC",
  "distinct": "",
  "fields": "wp_posts.ID, wpftsi_t.relev ",
  "limits": "LIMIT 0, 25"
}

Okay, this looks good. Do you see the same results in the Sandbox / Test Search or the results are different (check the result number)?

Still seems to show all the posts that don’t have the 3 words in the query: https://d.pr/i/XwwuJ6

It looks like “AND” operator does not work actually there, right?

What is the WPFTS version in your website currently?

It does work, the first results are fine, but it also shows tons of other results that don’t necessarily have all the words in the query.

I’m running version 1.59.211.

Okay, lets check one more thing.

Please go to the WPFTS Settings / Analytics and find latest frontend query row in the table (that shows a lot of results), click on it to see details and find “Query Parameters (actually used)” block. Copy its content for me please.

Thanks

This? https://d.pr/i/Ng1w9Q

Hi Rafael,

It looks like I found a tiny hidden bug that appears only in some cases. The file wpfts_search.php in this archive have it fixed. Could you please replace this file in your wpfts installation (in the /includes/ folder) and test if AND condition works properly now?

https://fulltextsearch.org/wpfts_search.zip

Thank you!

It seems like that fixed it, @epsiloncool! ??

Thank you very much!

Thank you a lot, it was a really bad bug ??