You are viewing limited content. For full access, please sign in.

Question

Question

Search document text not working

Laserfiche Search and Retrieval
Updated February 18, 2021
asked on December 9, 2015 • Show version history

I am searching for the text "Equipment Maintenance" in document text in my repository. I had it narrowed to the template, type of meeting file and even the date range that I wanted it to look through and it came up with zero results. I tried using wild cards to account for misspellings or OCR mistakes, but still nothing.

I then went in to each and every document in my date range to try to find it manually and it is most definitely there. A Ctrl+F even finds the exact phrase in my OCR'd document, several times in fact.

Where am I going wrong here?

I was just touting the searching abilities to our staff yesterday and today the CEO asks me how to structure this search to find what he needs and this is an utter fail. Can someone please direct me to what is going wrong here?

0 0

Answer

SELECTED ANSWER
replied on December 10, 2015

If the text does exist for the documents, then you may just have to re-index and not need to re-OCR or extract text again. This can be done from the Index node in the Laserfiche Administration Console. Instead of re-indexing the entire repository at once, you can also do this volume by volume. Alternatively, you can also use the Quick Re-index utility that ships with Laserfiche. The benefits of this is that it's faster than re-indexing through the Administration Console and can be done while still allowing users in the repository to perform text/indexed searches.

1 0

Replies

replied on December 9, 2015

Have you confirmed that the Laserfiche Full Text Search service (LFFTS) is started and running?

0 0
View 8 previous replies
replied on December 9, 2015

No. How would I confirm this?

0 0
replied on December 9, 2015

Go into services on the LF Server and find the Laserfiche Full Text Search service to view its status.

 

Also, the search screen shot looks like different fields then the document metadata screen shot (looks like text fields in search and list in metadata).  Was your search on the same repository that the found document is in?

0 0
replied on December 9, 2015

Thank you. I have my co-worker looking into that, since I don't deal with the server.

 

The search was the same repository that it was found in, we only have 1. Both the search metadata and the document metadata are drop down lists. The search I am mimicking the metadata assigned to the document.

 

I should mention that I eliminate the date range, only search for "equipment" and I get several hits, but not for what I was looking for. It appears that sometimes the text search is working, and sometimes not, which is not reassuring.

 

I will update with the LFFTS status when my co-worker gives me that update. Thasnks!

 

0 0
replied on December 9, 2015

Update on LFFTS - yes it was running. My co-worker re-set it and we're getting the exact same results as before.

0 0
replied on December 9, 2015

If you re-OCR or extract text and re-index the document, does it return in text searches then?

0 0
replied on December 10, 2015

Yes, re-OCR-ing that one document did make it show up in a text search. Does this mean I have to re-OCR my entire repository to make this work? (This is not a good option!)

0 0
SELECTED ANSWER
replied on December 10, 2015

If the text does exist for the documents, then you may just have to re-index and not need to re-OCR or extract text again. This can be done from the Index node in the Laserfiche Administration Console. Instead of re-indexing the entire repository at once, you can also do this volume by volume. Alternatively, you can also use the Quick Re-index utility that ships with Laserfiche. The benefits of this is that it's faster than re-indexing through the Administration Console and can be done while still allowing users in the repository to perform text/indexed searches.

1 0
replied on December 10, 2015

To expand on what Alex said, I'm pretty sure the documents are OCR'd since you're clearly showing the text pane for the document above. You could confirm that it simply needs to be reindexed by going to the same Generate Text dialog, but unchecking OCR (so that only the grayed-out index checkbox is checked). Reindexing your search index is almost certainly the way to go here. 

1 0
replied on December 10, 2015

Thank you! I found where and how to do this. Before I go ahead and do it though, might there be any unintended consequences of re-indexing? Is this going to create any noticeable change or slow anything down for our users when I do this?

0 0
replied on December 10, 2015

Reindexing basically wipes the index and recreates it from scratch (that's an oversimplification, but the general idea). So nothing will be full text searchable until it's added back in - but since right not nothing is full text searchable anyway, it shouldn't change anything. This won't impact other types of searches that do not use the full text search service. It may cause load on the machine hosting the search service.  

2 0
replied on December 10, 2015

Ok, thank you.

0 0
replied on December 9, 2015

That's what I was going to say Bert. The fields do not appear to be the same.

0 0
replied on December 10, 2015

How do the fields not appear to be the same? We have only 1 repository, I do a field search based on template. This pulls up the same template that I have assigned to my document. In the Name of Committee drop down I select Executive Committee, which is where I found the text.

 

I am not understanding what doesn't look the same? It is the same template, same field names, same drop downs. The only thing different is that in my search I am allowed to search for a date range and in the template assigned to my document it is a specific date.

0 0
replied on February 18, 2021

I have a situation whereby a user in a group encounters and indefinite search when he does a  field search. The others members are able to search using the same syntax.  Interestingly, it is a single field in a template that leads to this behavior. the rest of fields returns results. What might be the issue here?

0 0
You are not allowed to follow up in this post.

Sign in to reply to this post.

Details
Related Posts
Loading ...