Intentionally copied the subject line of this thread (from last August), and an
email from the thread is attached at the end of this email -
I ran into similar problems in custom sorting (memory leak due to caching) -
the subject has been well discussed in the thread but just want to add a voic
Just to add to the thoughtful responses from the others, it isn't really that
bad to do a new search each time. First, the later searches may likely be
"warm" searches and thus won't take as long as the first search; second, it's
the searcher.doc(docId) part that will likely hurt the most, but h
what fields did you search, the headlines field only?
DECAFFMEYER MATHIEU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: setBoost on Field Hi,
I am parsing this file called Logistics.htm
I have a field named "headlines" that contains word "clients" among others.
When I don't put a boost on this field,
How the indexes will be searched, do you need to search fields in both indexes?
If the ParallelReader is not an attractive solution for you, finding a general
solution may be difficult. Would it be possible to explore solutions that may
work for your specific case?
Just a thought.
Xiaocheng
C
Hi Michael,
if I understand your questions correctly - feels like I must have missed
something - here is what can do to achieve what you want:
index these fields:
to
from
content
subject
all (includes text from all the above 4 fields)
and use "all" as your default search field. Then when you
If I remember correctly, I once searched over 40G of indexes using
multi-searcher with 512M max heap size, how much memory did you give the JVM?
Thanks,
Xiaocheng
senthil kumaran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi.
I have more index directories (>6) all in GB,and searching my query with
single Ind
; wrote: Ya...I think i will store it in
the database so that later it could be used in scoring/ranking for
retrieval...:)
Another thing i would like to see is whether the precision or recall will be
much affaected by this...
Regards,
Maureen
Xiaocheng Luan wrote:One side-effect of
Or, you may index the fields that you want "exact matches" as non-tokenized.
Thanks,
Xiaocheng
Bhavin Pandya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi kainth,
>So for example if I have a field with this text: "world cup" and I do a
>search for "cup" I want it to return false but for another field that
>conta
One side-effect of turning off the norms may be that the scoring/ranking will
be different? Do you need to search by each of these many fields? If not, you
probably don't have to index these fields (but store them for retrieval?).
Just a thought.
Xiaocheng
Michael McCandless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Try to play with the similarity class/subclasses, it might help.
For example, you may adjust the coord to increase the chance (not necessary
guarantee?) that ORed results will be after the ANDed results; adjust the
sloppy factor to favor phrases, etc.
Xiaocheng
Sajid Khan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
urces, you store the raw data locally in case you
> need to do this again in the future. I know that's not much help, but
>
> Or, figure out how to make Lucene update-in-place, write the code, test it
> and submit a patch. I'm sure Erik, Otis et.al. would offer you profuse
>
ct the document from the index without potentially losing
information.
Hope this helps
Erick
On 8/29/06, Xiaocheng Luan wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Got a question. Here is what I want to achieve:
>
> Create a new index from an existing index, to change the boosting factor
> for some of the
Hi,
Got a question. Here is what I want to achieve:
Create a new index from an existing index, to change the boosting factor for
some of the documents (and potentially some other tweaks), without reindexing
it from the source.
Is there any tools or ways to do this?
Thanks!
Xiaocheng Luan
"pandemic", depending on the
underlying data set. It may be precompued or dynamically computed on a small
data set, any help wil be highly appreciated.
Thanks!
Xiaocheng Luan
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Not sure if this is the right place to report this issue:
The accuracy value, which can be set via setAccuracy(), is being modified in
SpellChecker.java when a word is checked. As a result, the "min" may be pushed
very high and will not suggest anything for later requests.
One workar
Hi,
I heard that Lucene loads the index into memory to do a search, which does
not sound quite right to me. I will not be surprised if Lucene is smart enough
to load
the index into memory when it is feasible, but I'd be surprised if it ALWAYS
loads index memory to do the search, which I
16 matches
Mail list logo
