# How to get scores from MySQL full text search **URL:** \ **Category:** Rails\ **Created:** [December 21, 2007, 5:41pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/how-to-get-scores-from-mysql-full-text-search/123879 "2007-12-21T17:41:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![mvargo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@mvargo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mvargo)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2007, 5:41pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/how-to-get-scores-from-mysql-full-text-search/123879/1 "2007-12-21T17:41:39Z")
The mysql match function returns scores. I am using the mysql full text indexing (don’t send the ferret sales pitch, I’ve seen it, its nice, I have my reasons\*) but the results don’t seem to be ranked in order of score. Is there anyway via the rails interface to get at the scores? my code does this: @searchtexts = SearchText.find(:all, :conditions =\> [‘match(stext) against (? in boolean mode)’, params[:searchtext].to\_s], :limit =\> 20) ideally i’d like to pass in an :order =\> “scores DESC” or something like that. Anybody ever figure this out? Mike Vargo \*reasons: If I have to scale to more than one mongrel server and I use ferret I have the problem of multiple servers looking at the same file system since the indexes are stored on the file system. Just like you put sessions into the db, you would have to figure this out. nfs mounts, file locking, rsync with a write master, it goes on. I don’t deny it can’t be done, but for my application, match() is much easier. ---
**Author:** ![mvargo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@mvargo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mvargo)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2007, 6:15pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/how-to-get-scores-from-mysql-full-text-search/123879/2 "2007-12-21T18:15:12Z")
mvargo wrote: > The mysql match function returns scores. I am using the mysql full > text indexing (don’t send the ferret sales pitch, I’ve seen it, its > nice, I have my reasons\*) but the results don’t seem to be ranked in > order of score. Is there anyway via the rails interface to get at the > scores? > > my code does this: > @searchtexts = SearchText.find(:all, :conditions =\> > [‘match(stext) against (? in boolean mode)’, > params[:searchtext].to\_s], :limit =\> 20) > > ideally i’d like to pass in an :order =\> “scores DESC” or something > like that. The mysql docs have this to say about full-text search and ordering by relevance, see [http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/fulltext-natural-language.html](http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/fulltext-natural-language.html) The next example shows how to retrieve the relevance values explicitly. Returned rows are not ordered because the SELECT statement includes neither WHERE nor ORDER BY clauses: mysql\> SELECT id, MATCH (title,body) AGAINST (‘Tutorial’) → FROM articles; ±—±----------------------------------------+ | id | MATCH (title,body) AGAINST (‘Tutorial’) | ±—±----------------------------------------+ | 1 | 0.65545833110809 | | 2 | 0 | | 3 | 0.66266459226608 | | 4 | 0 | | 5 | 0 | | 6 | 0 | ±—±----------------------------------------+ 6 rows in set (0.00 sec) So you would probably want this one mysql\> SELECT id, MATCH (title,body) AGAINST (‘Tutorial’) as score → FROM articles where MATCH (title,body) AGAINST (‘Tutorial’) order by score desc [http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Fulltext\_Boolean.html](http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Fulltext_Boolean.html) has comments about adding scores in boolean mode. You could try adding :select and :order entries to your arguments, @searchtexts = SearchText.find(:all, :select =\> “search\_texts.\*, match(stext) against (#{params[:searchtext]}) in boolean mode) as score”, :order =\> ‘score desc’, :conditions =\> [‘match(stext) against (? in boolean mode)’, params[:searchtext].to\_s], :limit =\> 20) Then you will hopefully find the array entries of @searchtexts have a field called ‘score’. Good luck, Stephan > Anybody ever figure this out? > > Mike Vargo > > \*reasons: If I have to scale to more than one mongrel server and I > use ferret I have the problem of multiple servers looking at the same > file system since the indexes are stored on the file system. Just > like you put sessions into the db, you would have to figure this out. > nfs mounts, file locking, rsync with a write master, it goes on. I > don’t deny it can’t be done, but for my application, match() is much > easier. ---
**Author:** ![mvargo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@mvargo](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mvargo)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2007, 6:20pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/how-to-get-scores-from-mysql-full-text-search/123879/3 "2007-12-21T18:20:54Z")
OK, so this was really lame on my part. But since I bugged everybody enough to post, i would post everybody my find. The match does order descending by scores. My problem was due to the “in boolean mode”. I did not understand the behavior of this feature correctly. What I thought the was: “In boolean mode works just like regular mode except you can use + and - as “has to” and “cannot have” modifies on words.” That is not correct. I got rid of the in boolean mode thing and the search works great ordering descending by score. Here is a couple of SQL examples I used to figure this out: The non-boolean way. 9 rows returned mysql\> SELECT id, MATCH(stext) AGAINST (‘bits’) AS score FROM search\_texts WHERE MATCH(stext) AGAINST(‘bits’) ; ±----±-----------------+ | id | score | ±----±-----------------+ | 775 | 4.2670655250549 | | 776 | 4.2670655250549 | | 777 | 4.2670655250549 | | 721 | 3.7272720336914 | | 773 | 3.5047345161438 | | 21 | 2.2674028873444 | | 10 | 0.91718238592148 | | 405 | 0.65290474891663 | | 268 | 0.1820078343153 | ±----±-----------------+ 9 rows in set (0.00 sec) The scores are a very good reflection of the relevancy of the term. records returned in that order. Second search in boolean mode. mysql\> SELECT id, MATCH(stext) AGAINST (‘bits’ in boolean mode) AS score FROM search\_texts WHERE MATCH(stext) AGAINST('bits’in boolean mode) ; ±----±------+ | id | score | ±----±------+ | 10 | 1 | | 21 | 1 | | 268 | 1 | | 405 | 1 | | 721 | 1 | | 773 | 1 | | 775 | 1 | | 776 | 1 | | 777 | 1 | ±----±------+ 9 rows in set (0.00 sec) I get the same nine rows, but they are ordered by id. And the scores are all 1. Hmm… score of 1 or 0, boolean mode… So if you want ordered by relevancy, don’t do the boolean trick. Thanks for you attention and sorry about such a lame post. Mike