No, that's a younger, handsomer man than me, Erik Hatcher.... Best Erick
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 7:26 AM, 建文 <tom.grade1...@163.com> wrote: > ** > ** > Erick: > you are the co-author of the lucene? > > 2011-09-07 > ------------------------------ > > janwen | China > website : http://www.qianpin.com/ > twitter : http://twitter.com/loujianwen > > ** > --------------------------------------------------------- > 网易闪电邮(fm.163.com),收发邮件、快如闪电! > ------------------------------ > 发件人: Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> > 发送时间: 2011-09-07 19:24 > 主 题: Re: lucene3.x vs lucene2.x > 收件人: java-user@lucene.apache.org > > > Oops, I was thinking I was on the Solr list, so forget the history > lesson..... > > that said, the rest of my previous comment still holds, the bleeding > edge Lucene code is still trunk, with the 3.x versions quite stable. I'd > still go with the 3.x versions for Lucene as well. > > Sorry for the confusion > Erick > > 2011/9/7 Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> > > > First, a small background on versions. There is no version 2. When > > Lucene and Solr merged, Lucene was on version 2.9 and Solr was 1.4.1 so, > > rather than have two different numbers (i.e. Solr 2.x and Lucene 3.x), > > Solr skipped 2 and went straight to 3. Now Solr and Lucene are released > > jointly and have the same versions. > > > > OK, that said, I really think that using Solr 1.4x is a mistake at this > > point. 3.x > > (current version 3.3, 3.4 to be released soon) is a much better idea, it > > has > > some very significant improvements. It is being used in production at a > > number > > of large sites, etc. It is quite stable and tested. > > > > The current bleeding-edge code is the "trunk" version, which will be 4.x > > when > > > it is released (possibly this year, although that's not certain). the 3.x > > code line > > gets some selected enhancements simultaneously with 4.x, but only ones > > that are considered either very safe or necessary. The risky changes are > > applied to the 4.x code line. > > > > Hope this helps > > Erick > > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 2:18 AM, 建文 <tom.grade1...@163.com> wrote: > > > >> ** > >> ** > >> hi: > >> We want to use lucene in our website,The team is confued with using > > >> which version in our project.I google a lot and see the changelog on apache > > >> site.But i did not get a lot more usefule info.I personally want to use the > > >> latest verion of lucene.But i can not persuade the team.Could anyone give > >> me > >> some info?thanks > >> 2011-09-07 > >> ------------------------------ > >> > >> janwen | China > >> website : http://www.qianpin.com/ > >> twitter : http://twitter.com/loujianwen > >> > >> ** > >> --------------------------------------------------------- > >> 网易闪电邮(fm.163.com),您的专属邮件管家 > >> ------------------------------ > >> 发件人: Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> > >> 发送时间: 2011-09-07 06:05 > >> 主 题: Re: Failed to create text index reader for .frq file > >> 收件人: java-user@lucene.apache.org > >> > >> > >> Hmmm, it rather looks like somehow some of your > >> index files got deleted from your index directory. > >> a .frq file is one of the files that contains document > >> frequency information. The fact that Lucene > >> can't find _166.frq indicates you've been using this > >> index for a while and created a bunch of segments. > >> > >> There exists a program called checkindex that > >> can be used to help figure out the state of your > >> index. See: > >> http://solr.pl/en/2011/01/17/checkindex-for-the-rescue/ > >> > >> And if you're using Java7, you should be aware > >> of: > >> > >> > http://lucene.apache.org/solr/#28+July+2011+-+WARNING%3A+Index+corruption+and+crashes+in+Apache+Lucene+Core+%2F+Apache+Solr+with+Java+7 > > >> > >> > >> What happens if you point Luke at your index? > >> > >> Best > >> Erick > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Nilesh Vijaywargiay > >> <nilesh.vi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > > >> > I am facing a error while processing a set of data.. the description says > >> > > >> > "Failed to create text index reader for .../.../_166.frq (The System > >> > cannot > >> > find the specified path). > >> > > >> > > >> > I have never seen this error in the past neither have I seen this file in > >> > > >> > the index folder ever. Does lucene take care of this file or we need > >> > some > >> > add-on or third party software for this particular file? > >> > > >> > Thanks > >> > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > >> > >> ** > > > > > > > > ** >