: That link appears to be referring to normalized scores (everything is <
: 1.0). Is it also not safe to use a threshold for raw scores?
Nope. The basic flaw in comparing scores between two queries still holds
... early messages in the threads linked to go into more detail, but as i
recall, the
> 2) independent of the scores being different, it is not safe to try and
> pick a score threshold, this is mentioned in the FAQ...
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-lucene/LuceneFAQ#head-912c1f237bb00259185353182948e5935f0c2f03
That link appears to be referring to normalized scores (everythin
: 1) I create an index with one document with a searchable field of "All
: dogs are brown." If I search on that index with a query of "All dogs
: are brown." I do not get a hit with score 1.0, but something low like
: 0.38. I tried looking at the scoring algorithm and can't make heads or
: tail
awesome, thank you very much!
Regards,
Martin
On Thursday 04 May 2006 17:15, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> : so the score is always correct, just the Explain can return values
> : greater than 0 although the query did not match the document due to a
> : bug in Explain? Are all version affected of that
On Mittwoch 03 Mai 2006 21:59, Rodrigo Marcuschi wrote:
> I am having problems using lucene 1.9.1. I was using 1.4.3 successfully,
Mhh, IndexModifier isn't part of Lucene 1.4, did you add it manually?
> documents I add, all I get is '1 docs in index'. If I DON'T close the
> modifier,
It must be
: so the score is always correct, just the Explain can return values
: greater than 0 although the query did not match the document due to a
: bug in Explain? Are all version affected of that? I use lucene 1.9.1.
1) the score returned by TopDocs or passed to a HitCollector is by
definition the co
: As I understand - IndexReader.terms() returns a termEnum of all the
: terms in the index, and I would have to iterate through all of them to
: pick out the ones from the fields that I want. Is there a better way
: to do this?
the TermEnum is garunteed to be in order. you can seek to a particul
: now very useful when combined. I'm going to investigate other means of
: taking into account the wildcard queries and handling them in a
: different way. Rest assured that if I find a solution I'll post it to
: the user group.
the most straight forward solution is to have two indexed files -- o
On Mittwoch 03 Mai 2006 01:46, Michael Dodson wrote:
> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: -1
This is what you get when you try to open a Lucene 1.9 index with Lucene
1.4.
Regards
Daniel
--
http://www.danielnaber.de
--
Thanks a lot for your quick support!
I found another site which describes the index structure and files.
http://lucene.apache.org/java/docs/fileformats.html
--
AFAIK Lucene will have an inverted index which maps tokens (term
Hi,
By default, Lucene create a directory for index on FileSystem. Is there a
plugin or support provided by Lucene to store the index in Databse instead
of FileSystem, where:-
1) Directory can be equal to table in DB .
2) Each file in the index directory represents one row in that table.
3) Data
so the score is always correct, just the Explain can return values greater
than 0 although the query did not match the document due to a bug in Explain?
Are all version affected of that? I use lucene 1.9.1.
Thanks!
Regards,
Martin
On Thursday 04 May 2006 09:27, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On 5/4/06,
On 5/3/06, Kiran Joisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I m working on a project where I will use lucene to make a search engine on
a database. I am new to lucene. I wrote a test program which indexes a table
and searches the same.. but now I m stuck on how to update the index in case
a database chan
There is also the following, that some guy named Erik contributed recently:
./contrib/regex/src/java/org/apache/regexp/RegexpTunnel.java
./contrib/regex/src/java/org/apache/lucene/search/regex/SpanRegexQuery.java
./contrib/regex/src/java/org/apache/lucene/search/regex/RegexQuery.java
./contrib/reg
On 5/4/06, Martin Kobele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
thank you very much. Let's hope the developers can get this bug fixed soon :)
While it would be nice to have a 100% accurate explain(), it should
only be used for debugging purposes (and it's normally going to be
*much* slower than using a Hit
Hi,
I am new to Lucene and this mailing list, so my apologies if these
questions have already been answered.
1) I create an index with one document with a searchable field of "All
dogs are brown." If I search on that index with a query of "All dogs
are brown." I do not get a hit with score 1.0,
Hi Chris,
thank you very much. Let's hope the developers can get this bug fixed soon :)
Regards,
Martin
On Wednesday 03 May 2006 17:17, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> : Now we want to use Search.search(Query, HitCollection).
> : HitCollection adds the document to a BitSet as soon as the score is
> : n
FieldCache.getStringIndex(reader,fieldName)
Good luck
Jelda
> -Original Message-
> From: Chun Wei Ho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 12:36 PM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Obtain terms for only particular field(s)
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a pretty lar
Hi,
I have a pretty large index and I would like to obtain all the Terms
for only one or two particular fields.
As I understand - IndexReader.terms() returns a termEnum of all the
terms in the index, and I would have to iterate through all of them to
pick out the ones from the fields that I want
Hi.
When I add new documents to my index, I sometimes end up with a larger
number of segments than i theoretically should be able to. I use all
the default settings.
If I have understood this right I should never experience more than nine
segments in my index when the mergeFactor is 10.
I would
On May 3, 2006, at 9:39 PM, JustineHMS wrote:
I m new to Lucene,
Just wondering if there is a way to realize sql 'Like' function in
Lucene as
following:
Select * from user_table where username like '%abc%'
I have checked with wildCardQuery, but it can not start with a '%'.
What about Regex
Chris
Your shot in the dark was correct, I am using Porter Stemming. Thanks to your excellent response I
understand now why wildcards and stemming are now very useful when combined. I'm going to
investigate other means of taking into account the wildcard queries and handling them in a different
22 matches
Mail list logo
