pashupathinath writes:
>how can i traverse through the values stored in the
> index and make sure that the new records are not
> duplicated ? once i encounter the duplicate primary
> key, i should be able to delete all the various fields
> values associated with that primary key.
>
There's
On Friday 08 April 2005 07:42, pashupathinath wrote:
> hi,
> i've created an index for database records. the
> problem is whenever i'm trying to update the database,
> i mean adding or deleting records from the database i
> want the index to be updated too.
>right now, i am adding new documen
: Is there a simple way to list all terms in a field?
: The only approach that I see is to use the IndexReader.terms() method
: and then iterate over all the results and build my list by manually
: filtering. This seems inefficient and there must be a better way that
: my newbie eyes don't see.
Mark, Here's a small piece of code that outputs a list of all terms
for a given field, in order of decreasing term frequency:
--- Requires Java 1.5 for PriorityQueue, or you can use Doug Lea's version ---
String field = "myfield".intern(); // intern
required for != below
In
hi,
i've created an index for database records. the
problem is whenever i'm trying to update the database,
i mean adding or deleting records from the database i
want the index to be updated too.
right now, i am adding new documents to the
existing index whenever i add new records to the
databa
Is there a simple way to list all terms in a field?
The only approach that I see is to use the IndexReader.terms() method
and then iterate over all the results and build my list by manually
filtering. This seems inefficient and there must be a better way that
my newbie eyes don't see.
---
I was reading an interesting article on O'Reilly about Native XML
Databases.
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2005/03/30/native.html
My initial reaction is someone is trying to take on relational database
again and this time it is a resurrection of hierarchical database.
But as I read on, I find th
: 2) I doubt that ordering on 2 fields like "time" up to sec (or even to min)
: and "integer" will be quicker when sorting using just one "long"
i wouldn't be so sure untill you benchmark it ...
The biggest issue is the total number of Terms per field that come into
play when you sort ... with m
Yura Smolsky wrote:
Hello, mark.
mh> 2) My app uses long queries, some of which include
mh> very common terms. Using the "MoreLikeThis" query to
mh> drop common terms drastically improved performance. If
mh> your "killer queries" are long ones you could spot
mh> them and service them with a MoreLik
Hello, mark.
mh> 2) My app uses long queries, some of which include
mh> very common terms. Using the "MoreLikeThis" query to
mh> drop common terms drastically improved performance. If
mh> your "killer queries" are long ones you could spot
mh> them and service them with a MoreLikeThis or simply
mh>
Hi! Eric,
Yes HighlightIt.java and HighlightTest.java works. I did attached the
file, Anyway here is the source:
1
2
3
4
5
6 javax.servlet.*
7 javax.servlet.http.*
8 java.io.StringWriter
9 java.io.StringReader
10 java.i
Hi all,
We are using Lucene to search business objects with simple queries, but
now we need advanced searchs.
For example, we have a user object which has as indexed fields the id
and its function, and an account object which has as indexed fields its
id and the id of the owner user.
Hi,
I don't know if this question has already been asked
as I couldn't find any clue on Mail Archive.
I would like to kown if there is a proper way to
refine the scoring of a fuzzy query in such a way :
taking in account only the best match for a given
position, and not to sum scores for all ma
Hello,
I'm pretty new to Lucene, and I'd like to have your point of view on the
following case.
I need to build a webapp that would manage workers' profiles and in each
profile, we allow to attach any documents (pdf, doc, video, ...). Pretty
basic. We need to index searchable documents (lucene) and
well,
1) it would be additional logic overhead to generate the unique id and keep
it global for all data providers
2) I doubt that ordering on 2 fields like "time" up to sec (or even to min)
and "integer" will be quicker when sorting using just one "long"
On Thursday 07 Apr 2005 06:38, Chuck Williams wrote:
> Mufaddal Khumri writes (4/6/2005 11:21 PM):
> >Hi,
> >
> >Am new to Lucene. I found the following page:
> >http://lucene.apache.org/java/docs/queryparsersyntax.html. At the bottom
> >of the page there is a section that in order to escape specia
In addition to the comments already made, I recently
recently found these changes to be useful:
1) Swapping out Sun 1.4.2_05 JVM for BEA's JRockit JVM
halved my query times. (In both cases did not tweak
any default JVM settings other than -Xmx to ensure
adequate memory allocation).
2) My app use
Daniel,
On Thursday 07 April 2005 00:54, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
> : Queries: The query strings are of highly differing complexity, from
> : simple x:y to long queries involving conjunctions, disjunctions and
> : wildecard queries.
> :
> : 90% of the queries run brilliantly. Problem is that 10%
18 matches
Mail list logo
