Haven't got a clue. And I can't have a clue since the answer would be
different if each doc had one field or 100 . About the only
thing I can think of is to try it and measure...
What is the use case where you'll be opening this index just to find
its version? Could you just do that once at progr
what do you think about the overhead of opening the IndexReader just to find
out the version?
e.g. if you have a large index, say 10M docs, just opening it to find out
the version, how big is the overhead?
-John
On 9/25/07, John Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> cool, thanks!
>
> On 9/25/07, Er
cool, thanks!
On 9/25/07, Erick Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sure, just index a *very special* document with one field that is
> shared by no other documents in your index. Put your
> custom signature in there.
>
> You can even get it very efficiently with TermEnum if you
> don't want t
Sure, just index a *very special* document with one field that is
shared by no other documents in your index. Put your
custom signature in there.
You can even get it very efficiently with TermEnum if you
don't want to search for it, but searching would also be very
fast. Put, say, two fields in th
Hi:
Is there a way to added custom signature data to a lucene index, e.g data
version etc?
Thanks
-John
Agreed. Perhaps I will abandon the static init. I really only put it as
an option due to your synchronized cost concerns (a preload allows non
synched read only access to the indexaccessor cache). Due keep in mind
that you don't have to use it though...if you dont preload, accessors
are created
I agree with you on the compromise aspect of the design.
In particular, I think it's hard to preload all the index accessors in
the static init while allowing users specify the analyzer for each dir
without requiring complicated config file ans using reflection.
So a good compromise might be aba
I think its just a compromise in the design, though it could be
improved. You only ever want a single Writer at a time on the index.
Those two flags are really just hints for when a Writer is first
opened...should it auto-commit and should it overwrite/create...if a
thread tries to writer concu
Mark,
Looking at your implementation of the DefaultIndexAccessor regarding the
writer, I think there could be a problem: you have only one cached
writer but the getWriter(boolean, boolean) allows 2 booleans, so
ideally, you need 4 cached writer. Otherwise if one starts with a writer
that over
What exactly is your problem? We'll be able to help u better if u can be
specific or paste some errors you are getting.
-- jruiz
- Original Message
From: Liaqat Ali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 11:03:08 PM
Subject: setting up luc
Rather than chase our tails, can you tell us what you have done so far?
-Grant
On Sep 25, 2007, at 11:03 AM, Liaqat Ali wrote:
Hi All
I m facing problems in setting up lucene. kindly some guy guide me
in this
--
Grant Ingersoll
http://lucene.grantingersoll.com
Luce
Hi All
I m facing problems in setting up lucene. kindly some guy guide me in this
On Tuesday 25 September 2007 03:05, Martin Bayly wrote:
>
> We have an application that performs searches against a Lucene based index
> and also against a Windows Desktop Search based index.
>
> For simple queries we'd like to offer our users a consistent interface that
> allows them to build ba
Jae Joo wrote:
>
> Sorry. I was confused Solr and Lucene mailing list.
>
> Jae
>
> On 9/11/07, Grant Ingersoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Note, this is a Solr construct and does not apply to a custom Lucene
>> application, even if the intent is correct.
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2007, at 9:34 AM,
14 matches
Mail list logo
