It appears that NumericTermAttributeImpl doesn't support cloning. Is this
simply an oversight, or is there a reason why this isnt possible?
I'm trying to clone a State containing a NumericTermAttribute, and I end up
with all of the BytesRefs being equal to the last instance, since the
Numeric
optimization. If they
aren't supported, we can just fall back to copying.
Sorry it will not help your case, but it would improve the situation
and can be done safely.
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Shaun Senecal
wrote:
> Excellent, this is pretty much exactly what I was looking for. I ag
).
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Shaun Senecal
wrote:
> Ya, I already have that set up. Thanks for the heads-up though!
>
>
> From: Uwe Schindler
> Sent: December 30, 2014 5:22 AM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: R
e
> directory, but all those that are copied as-is will move and disappear from
> source directory.
>
> Uwe
>
> -
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
>
>
> > -Original Message---
chindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Shaun Senecal [mailto:shaun.sene...@lithium.com]
>> Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 6:34 PM
>> To: java-user
>> S
chindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
> -Original Message-
> From: Shaun Senecal [mailto:shaun.sene...@lithium.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 6:34 PM
> To: java-user
> Subject: Re: manually merging Directories
>
for little demonstrated benefit. You'd spend a lot more
time trying to figure out the correct thing to do and then fixing
bugs than you'll spend waiting for the copy HDFS or no.
Best,
Erick
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Shaun Senecal
wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have a number of Directorie
Hi
I have a number of Directories which are stored in various paths on HDFS, and I
would like to merge them into a single index. The obvious way to do this is to
use IndexWriter.addIndexes(...), however, I'm hoping I can do better. Since I
have created each of the separate indexes using Map/R
ed as usual.
>
> -Grant
>
> On May 24, 2010, at 12:15 AM, Shaun Senecal wrote:
>
>> When a field is lazy loaded, the actual value is not retrieved from
>> the server until it is rendered by the UI. This is the same behaviour
>> as the LiveView that ExtGWT curre
When a field is lazy loaded, the actual value is not retrieved from
the server until it is rendered by the UI. This is the same behaviour
as the LiveView that ExtGWT currently supports. The difference is
that once a value has been retrieved once, LazyLoad will not fetch
that value from the server
r's distributed search feature is about querying multiple indexes and
> merging the results. Different indexes, but same schema.
>
> Erik
>
> On Apr 25, 2010, at 6:02 AM, Shaun Senecal wrote:
>
>> Is there currently a way to take a query, run it on multiple hosts
>> co
Is there currently a way to take a query, run it on multiple hosts
containing different indexes, then merge the results from each host to
present to the user? It looks like Solr can handle multiple hosts
supporting the same index, but my case requires each index to be
different.
-
I am rewriting some BooleanQueries and the end result contains some empty
queries.
The initial query is of the form: Field1:foo* Field2:foo* Field3:foo*
Field4:foo* Field5:foo* Field6:foo*
The rewritten query is of the form: ConstantScore(Field1:foo*)
ConstantScore(Field2:foo*) ConstantScore(Quer
Thanks Mike. The queries are now running faster than they ever were before,
and are returning the expected results!
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Shaun Senecal wrote:
> Ah! I thought that the ConstantScoreQuery would also be rewritten into a
> BooleanQuery, resulting in the same exc
less <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> 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 fir
ess <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> 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 ha
at 6:52 PM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> 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
> > Constan
2009 at 5:14 PM, Shaun Senecal wrote:
> 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
> pe
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
19 matches
Mail list logo
