Hi Andi, thanks for getting back on this issue. > Lucene 3.6 just got released a few days ago. Apart from your patch, the > PyLucene 3.6 release is ready. I'm about to go offline (email only) for a > week. > Let's revisit this patch then (first week of May). It's not blocking the > release > right now as, even if I sent out a release candidate for a vote, the three > business days required for this would take this into the time I'm away. > OK. I'll then try to summarize the current status and send you an update to the list later this week.
> Out of curiosity, why is this patch tied to the facetting module ? Can't you > use > the regular Java List implementations with it instead of a wrapped Python list > ? If there are no wrappers for the classes you want, it's certainly easier to > add > them and they would provide a more efficient operation as Java code (the > facet module) working with them wouldn't have to cross the VM barriers for > each and every access into these lists. > I've uploaded the mentioned sample code here: http://pythonfiddle.com/python-facet-search/ (could go into PyLucene distribution under samples directory) You can see the #TODO comment with JavaList and my initial motivation: the method call of 'setCategoryPaths' in CategoryDocumentBuilder at categoryDocBuilder = CategoryDocumentBuilder(taxo).setCategoryPaths(facetList) did throw an lucene.InvalidArgsError: (<type 'CategoryDocumentBuilder'>, 'setCategoryPaths',[<CategoryPath: root/a/f1>, <CategoryPath: root/a/f2>]) when passing a pure python list of CategoryPath objects. That's why I thought I'd need a JavaList here (and later used it with success!). Actually the method signature expects an argument type java.lang.Iterable here: http://lucene.apache.org/core/old_versioned_docs/versions/3_5_0/api/contrib-facet/org/apache/lucene/facet/index/CategoryDocumentBuilder.html#setCategoryPaths(java.lang.Iterable) I remember (from my code comments) having tried Arrays.asList() first, but noticed some type-casting problems ... However: I tried it again today and it seems to work now! (Not sure what I did in the first place or what actually went wrong ...) - just facetList = lucene.Arrays.asList(facetList) does it currently. So the above mentioned Facet Example actually runs without the JavaList implementation! Sorry for the confusion ,-) best regards Thomas -- OrbiTeam Software GmbH & Co. KG, Germany http://www.orbiteam.de > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Andi Vajda [mailto:va...@apache.org] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. April 2012 20:37 > An: pylucene-dev@lucene.apache.org > Betreff: Re: AW: PyLucene use JCC shared object by default > > > Hi Thomas, > > On Apr 18, 2012, at 6:31, "Thomas Koch" <k...@orbiteam.de> wrote: > > > Hi, > > sounds like an interesting project – may I ask what you actually > implemented and what’s the motivation (e.g. performance?)? > > > > I’ve started to experiment with the Facet support in Lucene (actually in > PyLucene – ported an example to Python) and found that facetted search > support in Lucene looks powerful (though API is still said to be > ‘experimental’ > and I can’t say anything about performance yet). I’m talking about the > org.apache.lucene.facet.* packages – part of the contrib part of Lucene and > available as JARs that’s accessible in PyLucene as well. I’m not that familiar > with Solr but AFAIK it’s based on Lucene (Java) and should (hopefully) use > the same Java code for its facet search support. Of course Solr adds some > nice configuration support and web GUI to Lucene, but the ‘core’ search is > built on Lucene (to my knowledge). So did you re-implement the Lucene > facet search/index code (like TaxonomyReader/Writer, FacetRequest stuff > etc.) in C++ or what part of Solr?? > > > > Regarding Facet support in PyLucene I can share the samples I’ve ‘ported’ > to Python so far. There’s still a patch pending for JavaList (required by > facet > features) which I come back to later on this list (still some open issues). > Hopefully this can be included in the PyLucene 3.6 version … > > Lucene 3.6 just got released a few days ago. Apart from your patch, the > PyLucene 3.6 release is ready. I'm about to go offline (email only) for a > week. > Let's revisit this patch then (first week of May). It's not blocking the > release > right now as, even if I sent out a release candidate for a vote, the three > business days required for this would take this into the time I'm away. > > Out of curiosity, why is this patch tied to the facetting module ? Can't you > use > the regular Java List implementations with it instead of a wrapped Python list > ? If there are no wrappers for the classes you want, it's certainly easier to > add > them and they would provide a more efficient operation as Java code (the > facet module) working with them wouldn't have to cross the VM barriers for > each and every access into these lists. > > Andi.. > > > > > Regards > > Thomas > > -- > > OrbiTeam Software GmbH & Co. KG > > Germany http://www.orbiteam.de > > > > > > Von: Caleb Burns [mailto:ca...@ridersdiscount.com] > > Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. April 2012 21:16 > > An: pylucene-dev@lucene.apache.org > > Betreff: PyLucene use JCC shared object by default > > > > Hi, > > > > I've finished the process at my organization of re-implementing SOLR's > faceting algorithm (in C++). > > > > We would like the public at large to have access to the work we've done > and plan to do. In order for this to be a real possibility the code needs to > be > built against and use the same JVM as the PyLucene installation does. The > most logical way we feel to have this accomplished is by having PyLucenes' > default installation use JCC as a Shared Object. > > > > We have yet more plans to extend and provide utilities that work with > PyLucene, but this all hinges on having the shared object. The only > alternative methodology would require the bundling of our source with the > PyLucene project itself as a fork. > > > > We are eager to start open sourcing our work, so please let us know what > would be the best way to integrate our work. > > > > -- > > Caleb Burns > > Developer | Riders Discount > > 866.931.6644 x851 | www.RidersDiscount.com > > > > Deal of the Day > > > > > >
