i know im a little late replying to this thread, but, in my humble opinion the
best way to aggregate values (not necessarily terms, but whole values in
fields) is as follows:
startup stage:
for each field you would like to aggregate create a hashmap
open an index reader and run
: default Sort.RELEVANCE, query response time is ~6ms. However, when I
: specify a sort, e.g. Searcher.search( query, new Sort( "mydatefield" )
: ), the query response time gets multiplied by a factor of 10 or 20.
...
: do a top-K ranking over the same number of raw hits. The performanc
: Scorer scorer =
: query.weight(indexSearcher).scorer(indexSearcher.getIndexReader());
You'd need to rewrite the query first to be safe.
A slightly higher level API approach would be a HitCollector that just
counts the hits...
http://lucene.apache.org/java/docs/api/org/apache/lucene/search/Hi
On Monday 29 May 2006 15:54, z shalev wrote:
> hi all,
>
> is there a faster way to retrieve ONLY the count of results for a query?
>
> lucene ranks (scores) the first batch of docs and sorts them by rank, this
is functionality i dont need in certain queries and i assume, not doing
hi all,
is there a faster way to retrieve ONLY the count of results for a query?
lucene ranks (scores) the first batch of docs and sorts them by rank, this is
functionality i dont need in certain queries and i assume, not doing this can
return the count faster then the hits.length()
I indexed a collection of Chinese documents. I use a special segmentation
api to do the analysis, because the segmentation of Chinese is different
from English.
A strange thing happened. With lucene 1.4 or lucene 2.0, it will be all
right to retrieve the corresponding documents given the terms
