Hi Jeff,
Yes, I am here but *very* busy -- I expect things to cool off in a week or
so at which time I intend to pickup the 1.9 port as well as the moving of
DotLucene from SourceForg.Net to it's incubated home at Apache.
If you have cycles and you can help, let me know as I am currently the only
On 9/13/05, Chris Hostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I just had another thought: is the number of results you get back from
> each of the filters the same as the number you get back if you apply no
> filter?
In one case yes, in another case no. I've been able to test to either some
res
I just had another thought: is the number of results you get back from
each of the filters the same as the number you get back if you apply no
filter?
If so, then:
a) Perhaps you don't realize this, but a Filter can never be used to
increase the number of results returned by a query. Filter's
if you can post a short unit test demonstrating the problem, that would
help us understand the problem you are having. At this point, i would
guess the problem relates to your custon filter.
if you look at the attachment to the bug i mentioned, you can see that the
"testFilters" method domonstra
On Sep 13, 2005, at 8:27 PM, James Reynolds wrote:
Please forgive this low tech question, but I'm wondering if Lucene
is an
appropriate solution for a challenge I'm facing. I need a quick
look up
method for a growing list of customers in a database (the alphabetical
select list has become t
Please forgive this low tech question, but I'm wondering if Lucene is an
appropriate solution for a challenge I'm facing. I need a quick look up
method for a growing list of customers in a database (the alphabetical
select list has become too cumbersome).
Lucene seems to be an excellent option f
Might be the same issue, haven't been able to determine during a
step-through on the code exec.
You're right, no need to add a new FilteredQuery to the statement, just a
search on combinedQuery with a new myCustomFilter.
Unfortunately, no joy; same response.
-- j
On 9/13/05, Chris Hostetter <[E
: Hits h1 = oMultiSearcher.Search(new FilteredQuery(combinedQuery, new
: myCustomFilter(1)));
: Hits h2 = oMultiSearcher.Search(new FilteredQuery(combinedQuery, new
: myCustomFilter(2)));
...do you get the same results if you use...
Hits h1 = oMultiSearcher.search(combinedQuery, myCustomFilte
I'm encountering some unexpected behavior teeing up multiple Hits objects
from a searcher, and I think I'm missing something obvious. Hoping a second
pair of eyes might see what I'm missing.
Here's my code sequence:
// Some liberties taken in the code regarding names, etc.
// v1.4.3 codebase
Bo
Hello,
The code in SVN has already been changed and the use of system
properties has been deprecated.
Otis
--- Paul Libbrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am facing the problem that the system property LOCK_DIR in
> FSDirectory seems to be loaded too early, that is, at classload
Hi,
I am facing the problem that the system property LOCK_DIR in
FSDirectory seems to be loaded too early, that is, at classloading
time, whereas I am setting this property myself later...
Dare I request that its initialization is done lazily ?
thanks
paul
---
Hello, (replying to java-user list, as that's the place to ask)
Your mergeFactor is waay to high. Leave it at the default (10).
Also look at IndexWriter javadocs, where mergeFactor and friends are
described. If you have Lucene in Action, mergeFactor is described in
detail in chapter 2 (see
h
Mayday, mayday
Has anyone had recent contact with George Aroush? He's presently managing
the C# port of Lucene.
Thanks,
Jeff Rodenburg
Hi,
I have many indices, one for each language, each one has been indexed
using a specific analyzer.
I want to search in all my indices, but I still want/need to use the
same analyzer that has been used for indexing.
MultiSearch only accept one query, and if I use for example QueryParser,
I ca
On Sep 13, 2005, at 7:24 AM, Madhu Satyanarayana Panitini wrote:
Hi Paul,
I agree with u "Analyzer is the magic word"
Lets look it in depth and clear, I would consider three parts in the
analyzer
1. Tokenization (splitting of words)
2. Stopwords removal (depends up on the language)
3. stemmin
cross-posting to all the Lucene e-mail lists
The Lucene issue tracking system has migrated from Bugzilla to JIRA.
Please use the new system for all issue tracking activities from this
point forward:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE
If a Lucene committer has the time to swit
Hi Paul,
I agree with u "Analyzer is the magic word"
Lets look it in depth and clear, I would consider three parts in the
analyzer
1. Tokenization (splitting of words)
2. Stopwords removal (depends up on the language)
3. stemming of the words (depends up on the language)
First to start analyze
Madhu,
Analyzer is the magic word here.
Lucene's StandardAnalyzer has a whole grammar to split words into
tokens. There are many more analyzers, most of which are language
specific (e.g. based the Snowball or Porter-stemmers, see contribs or
javadoc of core).
For which language do wish to u
This depends on the analyzer you are using. You can find the standard
analyzers in org.apache.lucene.analysis. To find out what they do, I
recommend the example in Lucene in action in 4.2.3 called
"AnalyzerDemo". If you don't have the book, you can also download the
examples from http://www.manning
Hai all
I want know the split pattern of text before indexing in Lucene, its
splits where ever there is space in between the words Or is there any
pattern in splitting the words of text document. In which program I can
find the code on the splitting of the word.
Madhu
Madhu Satyanarayana. Pan
20 matches
Mail list logo
