OK, got it. Thanks Yuval. Naama
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Yuval Feinstein <yuv...@answers.com>wrote: > Naama, > AFAIK, payloads store an arbitrary byte array per position > (see > > http://www.lucidimagination.com/blog/2009/08/05/getting-started-with-payloads/ > and > > http://www.lucidimagination.com/blog/2010/04/18/refresh-getting-started-with-payloads/ > ) > You define what you put in the payload during indexing, and how to use it > during retrieval. > It seems like you want to replace the default term vectors. > Payloads are an additional mechanism, on top of the term vectors. > This means that implementing payloads will have a memory and a run time > cost. > If you have no use for the original term vectors it makes more sense to > replace them using flex indexing, > Because the data structures and algorithms for handling term vectors are > more near the core of Lucene. > Hope this makes sense, > Yuval > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Naama Kraus [mailto:naamakr...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:19 AM > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: Re: Overriding Lucene's term weights computation > > ok, thanks Yuval. I'll take a look. > Could you (or anyone) please elaborate why payloads "seem like a worse fit" > ? > > TX, Naama > > On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Yuval Feinstein <yuv...@answers.com > >wrote: > > > Naama, Maybe you could use the new flexible indexing mechanism. > > Some information is in this lecture: > > > > > http://lucene-eurocon.org/slides/Lucene-Forecast-Version-Unicode-Flex-and-Mod_Willnauer&Schindler.pdf > > Alternatively, you may use payloads, but they seem like a worse fit. > > Good Luck, > > Yuval > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: Naama Kraus [naamakr...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 1:38 PM > > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: Overriding Lucene's term weights computation > > > > Hi, > > > > Is there a way for an application to index a document along with its > "term > > weighted vector" (Lucene's TermFreqVector). I.e., override the term > > frequencies computed by Lucene, with an application's computed term > weights > > (non frequency based) ? > > I don't think I want to use Scorer#score() for applying score changes as > > this one is activated at search time which won't work for me. > > > > Thanks for any insight, > > Naama > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
