Hello everyone,
I have made a search project by use of Lucene2.0
But when I use date sorting, the server is running very slow for the result
getting(about 3 sec but I dont sort the results the time of it is about
0.019 sec, there are 11 results to be hit).
document.add(new Field(docFieldName,
My dictionary filter currently implements next() and everything works well
when dictionary entries are replaced one-to-one. For example: Can =>
Canada.
A problem arises when I try to replace it with more than one word. Going
through next() I encounter "shutdown". But the dictionary entry takes
Hi,
I have a puzzling question about FieldCache; we use FieldCache to
speed up faceted search [just like solr does] and also to avoid
creating Document instances when listing results. It works great, but
for one field where performance is awful: on the order of 15-30
seconds for one index, and can
I'm cool :) I just think you are overcomplicating things.
Yes... I can use two words and OR
Suposse I query on this
The Lord of Rings: Return of King
The Lord of Rings: Fellowship
The Lord of Rings: The Two towers
The Lord of Weapons
The Lord of War
Suposse an user search: "The Lord of Rings
>
>
>
> I'm cool :) I just think you are overcomplicating things.
>
>
Yes... I can use two words and OR
Suposse I query on this
The Lord of Rings: Return of King
The Lord of Rings: Fellowship
The Lord of Rings: The Two towers
The Lord of Weapons
The Lord of War
Suposse an user search: "The Lord o
Leandro skrev:
Sorry, I missunderstood your question. See other reply.
Yes I got it. thanks
Are you sure about that? Did you benchmark? Can we see the results?
Hey man take it easy, I just imagine. But I guess use the ShingleFilter will
help.
I'm cool :) I just think you are overcompli
> Sorry, I missunderstood your question. See other reply.
>
Yes I got it. thanks
> Are you sure about that? Did you benchmark? Can we see the results?
Hey man take it easy, I just imagine. But I guess use the ShingleFilter will
help.
Leandro skrev:
1º Why need I pass a Directory objecto (obligatory) on constructor of
SpellChecker?
Mainly because it is a nasty peice of code. But it does a good job.
How can we suggest it (create an normal constructor without param) to the
team?
Sorry, I missunderstood your question. S
Mathieu Lecarme skrev:
Le 8 avr. 08 à 18:34, Karl Wettin a écrit :
dreampeppers99 skrev:
2º Suposse that in my dictonary I had these words:
"The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers"
"The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring"
"The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King"
I just want t
>
> Mainly because it is a nasty peice of code. But it does a good job.
> >
> Because spellChecker use a directory to store data. It can be FSDirectory,
> RAMDirectory
Perfect explanation... !!!
So use the RAMDirectory is better (perfomatically)
spell= new SpellChecker(FSDirectory.getDirect
Le 8 avr. 08 à 18:34, Karl Wettin a écrit :
dreampeppers99 skrev:
1º Why need I pass a Directory objecto (obligatory) on constructor of
SpellChecker?
Mainly because it is a nasty peice of code. But it does a good job.
Because spellChecker use a directory to store data. It can be
FSDirectory
Hi,
I am aware that there is already lots of discussions about field updates
in Lucene. I post my question anyway because I don't find any
information about my problem, which is to update a stored but
non-indexed field.
For example, I have for each document a stored and non-indexed binary
fie
>
>
> 1º Why need I pass a Directory objecto (obligatory) on constructor of
> > SpellChecker?
> >
>
> Mainly because it is a nasty peice of code. But it does a good job.
>
Thanks.
How can we suggest it (create an normal constructor without param) to the
team?
>
>
> 2º Suposse that in my dictona
dreampeppers99 skrev:
1º Why need I pass a Directory objecto (obligatory) on constructor of
SpellChecker?
Mainly because it is a nasty peice of code. But it does a good job.
2º Suposse that in my dictonary I had these words:
"The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers"
"The Lord of the Rings: The
Hi,
I have two question about this GREAT tool.. (framework, library...
"whatever")
Well I decide put spell checker on my applications and I start to read some
papers and "found out" the Lucene project...
Anyway, I make it works, but I just want to know...
1º Why need I pass a Directory objecto (
Use shingleFilter.
I'm working on a wider SpellChecker, I'll post a third patch soon.
https://admin.garambrogne.net/projets/revuedepresse/browser/trunk/src/java
M.
dreampeppers99 a écrit :
Hi,
I have two question about this GREAT tool.. (framework, library...
"whatever")
Well I decide put spe
Hi,
I have two question about this GREAT tool.. (framework, library...
"whatever")
Well I decide put spell checker on my applications and I start to read some
papers and "found out" the Lucene project...
Anyway, I make it works, but I just want to know...
1º Why need I pass a Directory objecto
Op Tuesday 08 April 2008 15:18:34 schreef Itamar Syn-Hershko:
> Paul,
>
> I don't see how this answers the question.
Towards the end, the page describes when a Scorer is called and
roughly what it does.
> I was asking why Lucene
> has to access the index with exact terms, and not use RegEx or
>
Agree with Nick that Jing's task doesn't really need Lucene if mostly
range search is needed. Database is good for range search.
But for his search on 'Select * from table where Name like
"%mymymy%"'. It's not a scalable solution for database. And using
Lucene makes a lot of sense.
The easiest wa
I think this should be a new thread since it's a different problem.
Based on your description, I don't see any compelling reasons for you to
use Lucene just for indexing purposes, since you are not indexing text
docs as you indicated. Claiming database of lacking performance is not
accurate and o
Lucene is a library to index data.
Its up to you to drive it the way you want.
Think about the search result, how would your user like to see the
information that the search page has brought up. Do they want to know page
numbers, or is it section number, or it could be even sentence number.
Depend
Lucene is a library to index data.
Its up to you to drive it the way you want.
Think about the search result, how would your user like to see the
information that the search page has brought up. Do they want to know page
numbers, or is it section number, or it could be even sentence number.
Dependi
Paul,
I don't see how this answers the question. I was asking why Lucene has to
access the index with exact terms, and not use RegEx or simpler wildcards
support internally? If Lucene will be able to look for "w?rd" or "wor*" and
treat the wildcards as wildcards, this will greatly improve speed of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
The need is:
I have millions of entries in database, each entry is in such format (more or
less)
ID NameDescription start (number) stop(number)
Currently my application uses the database to do search, queries are in the
following format:
Select * fr
24 matches
Mail list logo
