It sounds like the field you have entered this content in is not included in your index?

I have experienced something similar to this previously; essentially the index was out of date and the index nodes were pointing at old content node IDs.

Have you rebuilt your index from the Developer > Examine Management section?

Also I assume you are using the standard ExamineIndex.config configuration for the External Indexer - could you paste it here for us please along with the code you're using to initiate the search?

Hi and Thanks for your replies.

Tried rebuild of index - same search results afterwards :O(

I really don't do much out of the ordinary in my code, but please feel free to comment - or maybe if you have experinece with setup of the Full Text Search package instead:

This is my index setup from ExamineIndex.config:

  <!-- The internal index set used by Umbraco back-office - DO NOT REMOVE -->
  <IndexSet SetName="InternalIndexSet" IndexPath="~/App_Data/TEMP/ExamineIndexes/Internal/" />
  <!-- The internal index set used by Umbraco back-office for indexing members - DO NOT REMOVE -->
  <IndexSet SetName="InternalMemberIndexSet" IndexPath="~/App_Data/TEMP/ExamineIndexes/InternalMember/">
    <IndexAttributeFields>
      <add Name="id" />
      <add Name="nodeName" />
      <add Name="updateDate" />
      <add Name="writerName" />
      <add Name="loginName" />
      <add Name="email" />
      <add Name="nodeTypeAlias" />
    </IndexAttributeFields>
  </IndexSet>
  <!-- Default Indexset for external searches, this indexes all fields on all types of nodes-->
  <IndexSet SetName="ExternalIndexSet" IndexPath="~/App_Data/TEMP/ExamineIndexes/External/" />

This is the form that I post to my search result page via GET:

<form class="navbar-form hidden-xs hidden-sm hidden-lg searchForm" role="search" style="margin-left: 620px;">
                            <div class="input-group">
                                <input type="text" class="form-control searchFormControl" placeholder="søg" name="q" style="margin-left:80px; width:150px;">
                                <div class="input-group-btn">
                                    <button class="btn btn-default searchFormButton" type="submit" formaction="/vis-soegeresultater/" formmethod="get"><i class="glyphicon glyphicon-search"></i></button>
                                </div>
                            </div>
                        </form>

This is the markup in my search result page - ideas of alternatives much appreciated:

@inherits Umbraco.Web.Mvc.UmbracoTemplatePage
@{
    Layout = "Master.cshtml";
}
@{
    IEnumerable<IPublishedContent> results = null;
    if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(Request.QueryString["q"]))
    { 
        results = Umbraco.TypedSearch(Request.QueryString["q"]);
    }
    var resultText = results.Count() == 1 ? "resultat" : "resultater";
}
<div class="container">
    <div class="row">
        <div class="col-xs-12">
            <h1>Vi fandt @results.Count() @resultText for søgningen <em>@Request.QueryString["q"]</em></h1>
            <br />
            @if (results != null)
            {
                <ul>
                    @{
                        var contentText = "";
                    }
                    @foreach (var result in results)
                    {
                        <li>
                            <a href="@result.Url()">@result.Name</a> - @result.CreateDate.ToShortDateString()
                            <br />
                            @{
                                contentText = result.Properties.First().DataValue.ToString();
                                contentText = System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex.Replace(contentText, @"<[^>]+>|&nbsp;", "").Trim();
                                contentText = System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex.Replace(contentText, @"\s{2,}", " ");
                            }
                            <p>@Html.Raw(contentText.Length > 500 ? contentText.Substring(0, 500) + "..." : contentText.Substring(0, contentText.Length))</p>
                            <br/><br />
                        </li>
                    }
                </ul>
            }
        </div>
    </div>
</div>

• Your ExamineIndex should be indexing all fields, so that looks fine.

• The form is just a textbox and submit button so that looks fine too.

• The search logic is nice and simple and you're taking the count from the returned enumerable so that should be accurate.

The next thing to do is to take a peek inside your Index and see what's there. You can in theory do that using Developer > Examine Management > Searchers > ExternalSearcher, however I have discovered that running this query can cause the page to stop responding if you have a large number of content nodes.

What I recommend instead is using Luke, available here: Luke - Lucene Index Tooblbox

Point this at the location of your indexes - usually:

[Application Root]\App_Data\TEMP\ExamineIndexes\External\Index

Then open up the 'Search' tab, set the following:

• Analyzer = Lucene.Net.Analysis.SimpleAnalyzer
• Default field = __IndexType
• Search expression = content

This will return all indexed nodes to you in a tabulated form, check that the nodes you expect to see are there and their 'content' node contains the search terms you expect.

If you are sure the above is correct, you can switch the Default field to 'content' and try your searches again. If you are successful in returning nodes this way, we can look to implement a slightly more hands-on search mechanism in your original code.

/Chris

Sorry, I linked you to the Java version! I have more success with the .NET version:

Luke.NET

No, you don't need to worry about setting a specific analyser for ExternalSearcher in your config files, the default configuration should work just fine - this was purely to get some results coming out of Luke.

You can have a little play around with the analysers, it's interesting to see how you can finetune your search with them. The Simple Analyser is merely the most straightforward.

Glad to hear you got it working in the end!

is working on a reply...