Hello Lucene users:
In the past we have discussed our backwards-compatibility policy
frequently on the Lucene developer mailinglist and we are thinking about
making some significant changes. In this mail I'd like to outline the
proposed changes to get some feedback from the user community.
Our c
Ah! I thought that the ConstantScoreQuery would also be rewritten into a
BooleanQuery, resulting in the same exception. If that's the case, then
this should work. I'll give that a try when I get into the office this
morning.
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 6:46 AM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemcca
Well, you could wrap the C | D filter as a Query (using
ConstantScoreQuery), and then add that as a SHOULD clause on your
toplevel BooleanQuery?
Mike
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Shaun Senecal wrote:
> At first I thought so, yes, but then I realised that the query I wanted to
> execute was A
At first I thought so, yes, but then I realised that the query I wanted to
execute was A | B | C | D and in reality I was executing (A | B) & (C | D).
I guess my unit tests were missing some cases and don't currently catch
this.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikem
Hi folks,
I would like to know if people are interested in the OpenRelevance project
(http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/OpenRelevance).
I've done quite a few experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk using TREC and INEX
data sets, so one approach would be to use crowdsourcing for such task.
Rega
http://www.lucidimagination.com/How-We-Can-Help/webinar-Lucene-29
here can you download the slides and watch the webinar.
simon
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Eran Sevi wrote:
> Is there a recording of the Webinars for anyone who's missed it?
>
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 12:03 AM, wrote:
>
>>
The query is:
+payloadNear([spanNear([contents:insurance, contents:agent], 1, false),
spanNear([contents:winston, contents:salem], 1, false)], 10, false)
It's using the default payload function scorer (average value)
It doesn't happen on all queries of this type, only a handful. This is
pr
Are you using any custom query types? Anything to help us reproduce
(like the acutal query this happened on) would be greatly appreciated.
-Yonik
http://www.lucidimagination.com
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Peter Keegan wrote:
> I'm using Lucene 2.9 and sometimes get a NPE in NearSpansUnor
I'm using Lucene 2.9 and sometimes get a NPE in NearSpansUnordered:
java.lang.NullPointerException
at
org.apache.lucene.search.spans.NearSpansUnordered.start(NearSpansUnordered.java:219)
at
org.apache.lucene.search.payloads.PayloadNearQuery$PayloadNearSpanScorer.processPayloads(PayloadNearQuery.j
Yeah this was a change in 2.9... but you can get the scores back, if
you do this:
TopFieldCollector tfc = TopFieldCollector.create(sort, numHits,
fillFields,
true /*
trackDocScores */,
The default API searcher.search works like this now. If you want to control,
the retrieval of scores, create a TopFieldCollector directly:
http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_9_0/api/all/org/apache/lucene/search/TopFiel
dCollector.html
The static create methods has many possibilities to control the be
Hi,
our application enables sorting the result lists according to field values,
currently all represented as Strings (we plan to also migrate to the new
numeric type capabilities of Lucene 2.9 at a later time)
For this, the documents will be sorted e.g. according to the author, which
works fine w
Is there a recording of the Webinars for anyone who's missed it?
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 12:03 AM, wrote:
> *Description*
>
>
>
> __
>
> Free Webinar: Apache Lucene 2.9: Discover the Powerful New Features
> ---
>
> J
You should be able to do exactly what you were doing on 2.4, right?
(By setting the rewrite method).
Mike
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Shaun Senecal wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation Mike. It looks like I have no choice but to move
> any queries which throw TooManyClauses to be Filters. S
http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_9_0/queryparsersyntax.html#Boosting%20a%20Term
--
Ian.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Chuan wrote:
>
> For example, I want the term 'sport' to have more impact on the final rank.
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Chuan
--
For example, I want the term 'sport' to have more impact on the final rank.
Thanks in advance.
Chuan
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/How-to-set-boost-for-a-certain-term-in-a-query-tp25909737p25909737.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.
Grant,
I have an index with documents that have a text field containing
document text, and a tag field containing tags associated with the
document. I am trying to calculate the probability that a document
contains a particular word and is tagged with a particular tag.
This is related to a MoreLik
14 okt 2009 kl. 15.15 skrev Grant Ingersoll:
On Oct 12, 2009, at 10:46 PM, Thomas D'Silva wrote:
I am trying to compute the counts of terms of the documents
returned by running a query using a TermVectorMapper.
I was wondering if anyone knew if there was a faster way to do this
rather than
Thanks for the explanation Mike. It looks like I have no choice but to move
any queries which throw TooManyClauses to be Filters. Sadly, this means a
max query time of 6s under load unless I can find a way to rewrite the query
to span a Query and a Filter.
Thanks again
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 4:57 AM, Shaun Senecal wrote:
> Up to Lucene 2.4, this has been working out for us. However, in
> Lucene 2.9 this breaks since rewrite() now returns a
> ConstantScoreQuery.
You can get back to the 2.4 behavior by calling
prefixQuery.setRewriteMethod(prefixQuery.SCORING_B
Hi,
there is also the SIREn plugin [1] that allows to index multi-valued
fields, with values of variable length, and to query them individually.
[1] http://siren.sindice.com
--
Renaud Delbru
On 12/10/09 21:31, Angel, Eric wrote:
I need to analyze these values since I also want the benefits
p
Sorry for the double post, but I think I can clarify the problem a little
more.
We want to execute:
query: A | B | C | D
filter: null
However, C and D cause TooManyClauses, so instead we execute:
query: A | B
filter: C | D
My understanding is that Lucene will apply the Filter (C
I know this has been discussed to great length, but I still have not found a
satisfactory solution and I am hoping someone on the list has some ideas...
We have a large index (4M+ Documents) with a handful of Fields. We need to
perform PrefixQueries on multiple fields. The problem is that when t
23 matches
Mail list logo
