*Warm Regards,*
*Amitesh K*
-- Forwarded message -
From: Amitesh Kumar
Date: Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 7:03 AM
Subject: How to retain % sign against numbers in lucene indexing/ search
To:
Hi Group,
I am facing a requirement change to get % sign retained in searches. e.g
Sample
Hi all,
We are indexing documents using apache lucene using several parallel
indexing pipelines(java process) to NFS mounted directory.
All of them follows same code and workflow most of the pipelines succeeds
without any issue, but only only few indexing pipelines remains in idle and
in RUN state
this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Deleting-document-from-Lucene-indexing-not-working-in-version-34-tp4321911.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To
I finally dug into this, and it turns out the nightly benchmark I run had
bad bottlenecks such that it couldn't feed documents quickly enough to
Lucene to take advantage of the concurrent hardware in beast2.
I fixed that and just re-ran the nightly run and it shows good gains:
https://plus.google.
you won't see indexing improvements there because the dataset in
question is wikipedia and mostly indexing full text. I think it may
have one measly numeric field.
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Otis Gospodnetić
wrote:
> (replying to my original email because I didn't get people's replies, even
(replying to my original email because I didn't get people's replies, even
though I see in the archives people replied)
Re BJ and beast2 upgrade. Yeah, I saw that, but
* if there is no indexing throughput improvement after that, does that mean
that those particular indexing tests happen to be
As someone who runs Lucene on big hardware, I'd be very interested to see
the tuning parameters when you do get a chance..
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> Yes, dual 2699 v3, with 256 GB of RAM, yet indexing throughput somehow
> got slower
Yes, dual 2699 v3, with 256 GB of RAM, yet indexing throughput somehow
got slower :) I haven't re-tuned indexing threads, IW buffer size yet
for this new hardware ...
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya
wrote:
> Wow, 72 cores? T
Wow, 72 cores? That sounds astounding. Are they dual Xeon E5 2699 v3 CPUs
with 18 cores each, with hyperthreading = 18*2*2=72 threads?
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Dawid Weiss wrote:
> The GC change is after this:
>
> BJ (2015-12-02): Upgrade to beast2 (72 cores, 256 GB RAM)
>
> which leads
The GC change is after this:
BJ (2015-12-02): Upgrade to beast2 (72 cores, 256 GB RAM)
which leads me to believe these results are not comparable (different
machines, architectures, disks, CPUs perhaps?).
Dawid
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Otis Gospodnetić
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was looking a
Hi,
I was looking at Mike's
http://home.apache.org/~mikemccand/lucenebench/indexing.html secretly
hoping to spot some recent improvements in indexing throughput but
instead it looks like:
* indexing throughput hasn't really gone up in the last ~5 years
* indexing was faster in 2014, but then
Hyper-threading should help Lucene indexing go faster, when it's not
IO bound ... I found 20 threads (on 12 real cores, 24 with HT) to be
fastest in the nightly benchmark
(http://people.apache.org/~mikemccand/lucenebench/indexing.html).
But it's curious you're unable to saturate o
AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Cc: Anahita Shayesteh-SSI
Subject: Re: Lucene indexing speed on NVMe drive
: Hi. I am studying Lucene performance and in particular how it benefits from
faster I/O such as SSD and NVMe.
: parameters as used in nightlyBench. (Hardware: Intel Xeon, 2.5GHz, 20
: proc
: Hi. I am studying Lucene performance and in particular how it benefits from
faster I/O such as SSD and NVMe.
: parameters as used in nightlyBench. (Hardware: Intel Xeon, 2.5GHz, 20
: processor ,40 with hyperthreading, 64G Memory) and study indexing speed
...
: I get best performance
Hi. I am studying Lucene performance and in particular how it benefits from
faster I/O such as SSD and NVMe.
I am using nightlybench for indexing wiki (1K docs) with similar parameters as
used in nightlyBench. (Hardware: Intel Xeon, 2.5GHz, 20 processor ,40 with
hyperthreading, 64G Memory) and s
PM, Jason Wu wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
> Thanks for your response. I only call the commit when all my docs are added.
>
> Here is the procedure of my Lucene indexing and re-indexing:
>
>1. If index data exists inside index directory, remove all the index
>data.
>
Hi Gary,
Thanks for your response. I only call the commit when all my docs are added.
Here is the procedure of my Lucene indexing and re-indexing:
1. If index data exists inside index directory, remove all the index
data.
2. Create IndexWriter with 256MB RAMBUFFERSIZE
3. Process
ext:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Making-lucene-indexing-multi-threaded-tp4087830p4166116.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apac
n and take 22 mins.
Did you have any similar experience like the above before?
Thank you,
Jason
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Making-lucene-indexing-multi-threaded-tp4087830p4166116.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabbl
@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Making lucene indexing multi threaded
Hi Nischal,
I had similar indexing issue. My lucene indexing took 22 mins for 70 MB
docs. When i debugged the problem, i found out the
indexWriter.addDocument(doc) taking a really long time.
Have you already found the solution about it
Hi Nischal,
I had similar indexing issue. My lucene indexing took 22 mins for 70 MB
docs. When i debugged the problem, i found out the
indexWriter.addDocument(doc) taking a really long time.
Have you already found the solution about it?
Thank you,
Jason
--
View this message in context:
http
Hi Team,
I am a new user of Lucene 4.8.1. I encountered a Lucene indexing
performance issue which slow down my application greatly. I tried several
ways from google searchs but still couldn't resolve it. Any suggestions
from your experts might help me a lot.
One of my application uses the l
not sure if i'm in the right place but, looking for help with lucene
indexing in alfresco.
It looks like indexing is turned on however, i'm specifically having issues
with not being able to query values on a custom property in a custom model.
I added the index enable on the field but
-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: query regarding Lucene Indexing and searching
Sir i am PG student, my research topic is to optimize the indexing file
[reduce index file size, RAM usage, CPU utilization, and create index with
payload to improve searching speed].
Currently working scope is Desktop
Sir i am PG student, my research topic is to optimize the indexing file
[reduce index file size, RAM usage, CPU utilization, and create index with
payload to improve searching speed].
Currently working scope is Desktop search engine
1.i am using lucene for indexing the pdf files[indexing file nam
takes. 9 times out of 10, the bottleneck is here.
> > As a comparison, I can index 3-4K docs/second on my laptop.
> > This is using Solr and is the Wikipedia dump so the docs
> > are several K each.
> >
> > So, if you're going to multi-thread, you'll probably want
e data and feed that
> through a separate thread that actually does the indexing,
> you don't want multiple IndexWriters active at once.
>
> FWIW,
> Erick
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 10:13 AM, nischal reddy
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am thi
Erick
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 10:13 AM, nischal reddy
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am thinking to make my lucene indexing multi threaded, can someone
> throw
> > some light on the best approach to be followed for achieving this.
> >
> > I
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/ImproveIndexingSpeed which gives
good advices on how to improve Lucene indexing speed.
--
Adrien
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-u
#x27;ll probably want to
multi-thread the acquisition of the data and feed that
through a separate thread that actually does the indexing,
you don't want multiple IndexWriters active at once.
FWIW,
Erick
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 10:13 AM, nischal reddy
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am thinki
Hi,
I am thinking to make my lucene indexing multi threaded, can someone throw
some light on the best approach to be followed for achieving this.
I will give short gist about what i am trying to do, please suggest me the
best way to tackle this.
What am i trying to do?
I am building an index
Use SimpleFSLockFactory. See the javadocs about locks being left
behind on abnormal JVM termination.
There was a thread on this list a while ago about some pros and cons
of using lucene on NFS. 2-Oct-2012 in fact.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/lucene-java-user/201210.mbox/thread
--
I
Hello,
I have been getting the following lock error when attempting to open an
index writer to add new documents to an index.
org.apache.lucene.store.LockObtainFailedException
Lock obtain timed out:
NativeFSLock@/opt/shared/data/CTXTMNG/PAC_INDEX/lucene/aero/prod/index/write.lock
I believe this i
This is expected, when you have a reader still open on a point-in-time
snapshot of the index, yet the writer is still indexing/merging. The
writer will delete old files, but the reader still has them open, so
you see those "(deleted)" entries in the lsof output.
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikem
Oh sry,
I got my error and it worked.
Thanks
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Pranav goyal wrote:
> import java.io.File;
> import java.io.IOException;
> import java.util.Collection;
> import java.util.Iterator;
> import java.util.List;
> import java.util.Map;
>
> import org.apache.lucene.analysi
import java.io.File;
import java.io.IOException;
import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.Iterator;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.Map;
import org.apache.lucene.analysis.Analyzer;
import org.apache.lucene.analysis.standard.StandardAnalyzer;
import org.apache.lucene.document.Document;
If i understand the requirement correctly, contract is one document in your
system which in turn contains some *'n*' fields. Contract_ID is the key in
all the documents(Structures). Contract_ID is the only field you want to
retrieve no matter on what field you search for. If this is the case, store
Hi all,
Got stuck at a place and not able to think what should I do.
I have one structure which I have to index. Let say the structure name is
Contract which has a unique Contract_ID. Let say I have 50 contracts which I
have to index.
Now each contract has let say 100 different keys with their va
Yes,
You'd need to delete the document and then re-add a newly created document
object. You may use the key and delete the doc using the Term(key, value).
--
Anshum Gupta
http://ai-cafe.blogspot.com
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Pranav goyal wrote:
> Hi Anshum,
>
> Thanks for answering my que
Hi Anshum,
Thanks for answering my question. By this I got to know that I cannot update
without deleting my document.
So whenever I am indexing the documents first I need to check whether the
particular key exists in the document or not and if it exists I need to
delete it and add the updated one
Hii Pranav,
By what you've mentioned, it looks like you want to modify a particular
document (or all docs) by adding a particular field in the document(s). As
of right now, its not possible to modify a document inside a lucene index.
That is due to the way the index is structured. The only way as
Hi all,
I am a newbie to lucene.
I have successfully created my lucene index. But I am not getting how to
invalidate previous indexes whenever I add/delete/update any field in my
lucene index.
Please help me out.
for better understanding I have wrote my indexing function :
StandardAnalyzer analy
://sematext.com/ :: Solr - Lucene - Nutch
Lucene ecosystem search :: http://search-lucene.com/
- Original Message
From: Shuai Weng
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Fri, August 20, 2010 5:47:31 PM
Subject: Re: lucene indexing configuration
Hey,
Currently we have indexed some biological
://search-lucene.com/
- Original Message
> From: Shuai Weng
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Sent: Fri, August 20, 2010 5:47:31 PM
> Subject: Re: lucene indexing configuration
>
>
> Hey,
>
> Currently we have indexed some biological full text pages, I wa
Hey,
Currently we have indexed some biological full text pages, I was wondering how
to config the schema.xml such that
the gene names 'met1', 'met2', 'met3' will be treated as different words.
Currently they are all mapped to 'met'.
Thanks,
Shuai
at 8:27 AM, ajay_gupta
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Hi,
>>> >>>>> It might be general question though but I couldn't find the answer
>>> yet.
>>> >>>>> I
&g
ve around 90k documents sizing around 350 MB. Each document
>> contains
>> >>>>> a
>> >>>>> record which has some text content. For each word in this text I
>> want
>> >>>>> to
>> >>>>> store context for that word a
n of this method and I
>>>>> observed that after each call of update_context memory increases and
>>>>> when
>>>>> it
>>>>> reaches around 65-70k it goes outofmemory so somewhere memory is
>>>>> increasing
>>>>>
ystem.gc() to release
>>>> memory
>>>> and I also tried various other parameters like
>>>> context_writer.setMaxBufferedDocs()
>>>> context_writer.setMaxMergeDocs()
>>>> context_writer.setRAMBufferSizeMB()
>>>> I set these parame
rameters smaller values as well but nothing worked.
>>>
>>> Any hint will be very helpful.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Ajay
>>>
>>>
>>> Michael McCandless-2 wrote:
>>> >
>>> > The worst case RAM usage for Lucene i
ument -- it must flush after the doc has been fully
>> > indexed.
>> >
>> > This past thread (also from Paul) delves into some of the details:
>> >
>> > http://lucene.markmail.org/thread/pbeidtepentm6mdn
>> >
>> > But it's not clear whe
gt; > more details about the docs, or, some code fragments, could help shed
> > light.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Murdoch, Paul
> > wrote:
> >> Ajay,
> >>
> >> Here is another thread I started on the same issue.
> >
e.
>>
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1362460/why-does-lucene-cause-oom-whe
>> n-indexing-large-files
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: java-user-return-45254-paul.b.murdoch=saic@lucene.apache.org
>> [mailto
5254-paul.b.murdoch=saic@lucene.apache.org
> [mailto:java-user-return-45254-paul.b.murdoch=saic@lucene.apache.org
> ] On Behalf Of ajay_gupta
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 8:28 AM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Lucene Indexing out of memory
>
>
> Hi,
&g
> and
> >>>>> for each word in that document I am appending fixed number of
> >>>>> surrounding
> >>>>> words. To do that first I search in existing indices if this word
> >>>>> already
> >
d the new context
>>>>> and
>>>>> update the document. In case no context exist I create a document with
>>>>> fields "word" and "context" and add these two fields with values as
>>>>> word
>>>>> value and
t;> fields "word" and "context" and add these two fields with values as
>>>> word
>>>> value and context value.
>>>>
>>>> I tried this in RAM but after certain no of docs it gave out of memory
>>>>
;> error
> >> so I thought to use FSDirectory method but surprisingly after 70k
> >> documents
> >> it also gave OOM error. I have enough disk space but still I am getting
> >> this
> >> error.I am not sure even for disk b
; documents
>>> it also gave OOM error. I have enough disk space but still I am getting
>>> this
>>> error.I am not sure even for disk based indexing why its giving this
>>> error.
>>> I thought disk based indexing will be slow but atleast it will be
>>
disk space but still I am getting
>> this
>> error.I am not sure even for disk based indexing why its giving this
>> error.
>> I thought disk based indexing will be slow but atleast it will be
>> scalable.
>> Could so
-paul.b.murdoch=saic@lucene.apache.org
] On Behalf Of ajay_gupta
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 8:28 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Lucene Indexing out of memory
Hi,
It might be general question though but I couldn't find the answer yet.
I
have around 90k documents sizing around 3
cene.apache.org
] On Behalf Of ajay_gupta
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 8:28 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Lucene Indexing out of memory
Hi,
It might be general question though but I couldn't find the answer yet.
I
have around 90k documents sizing around 350 MB. Each document con
0k documents
> it also gave OOM error. I have enough disk space but still I am getting
> this
> error.I am not sure even for disk based indexing why its giving this error.
> I thought disk based indexing will be slow but atleast it will be scalable.
> Could someone suggest what could b
ave enough disk space but still I am getting this
error.I am not sure even for disk based indexing why its giving this error.
I thought disk based indexing will be slow but atleast it will be scalable.
Could someone suggest what could be the issue ?
Thanks
Ajay
--
View this message in context:
htt
nd field2?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 09:44:35 -0800
> > > Subject: Re: What is the best way to handle the primary key case during
> > luceneindexing
> > > From: jake.man...@gmail.com
> > > To: java-user@lucene.apache
09 09:44:35 -0800
> > Subject: Re: What is the best way to handle the primary key case during
> luceneindexing
> > From: jake.man...@gmail.com
> > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> >
> > The usual way to do this is to use:
> >
> >IndexWriter.upd
ry key case during
> lucene indexing
> From: jake.man...@gmail.com
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
>
> The usual way to do this is to use:
>
>IndexWriter.updateDocument(Term, Document)
>
> This method deletes all documents with the given Term in it (this
What I mean is that for one index, client can defined multi field in the index
as the primary key (composite key).
> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:45:40 -0500
> Subject: Re: What is the best way to handle the primary key case during
> lucene indexing
> From: erickerick...@gm
Sorry, forgot to add "then re-add the documents in question".
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Erick Erickson wrote:
> What is the form of the unique key? I'm a bit confused here by your
> comment:
> "which can contain one or multi fields".
>
> But it seems like IndexWriter.deleteDocuments shoul
What is the form of the unique key? I'm a bit confused here by your comment:
"which can contain one or multi fields".
But it seems like IndexWriter.deleteDocuments should work here. It's easy
if your PKs are single terms, there's even a deleteDocuments(Term[]) form.
But this really *requires* that
The usual way to do this is to use:
IndexWriter.updateDocument(Term, Document)
This method deletes all documents with the given Term in it (this would be
your primary key), and then adds the Document you want to add. This is the
traditional way to do updates, and it is fast.
-jake
On Mo
Hi,
In our application, we will allow the user to create a primary key defined in
the document. We are using lucene 2.9.
In this case, when we index the data coming from the client, if the metadata
contains the primary key defined,
we have to do the search/update for every row based on the pr
Hi All,
I'm trying to index some indian web page content which are basically a mix
of indian and say 5% of english content in the same page itself. For all
this I can not use standard or simple analyzer as they break the non-english
words in a wrong places say[because the isLetter(ch) happens to be
Its about building a custom similarity class that scores using your
normalization factors etc.
This might help in that case,
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/lucene/java-user/69553
--
Anshum Gupta
Naukri Labs!
http://ai-cafe.blogspot.com
The facts expressed here belong to everybody, the opini
Hi Anshum,
Even that document says that higher frequency implied higher score. My
doubt is if the score is based only on the frequency, won't it be
inappropriate for Internet based search? For example, if Google did the
same thing, when I search for "Microsoft", there is a chance that Google
Hi msr,
Perhaps this could be useful for you. Lucene implements a modified vector
space model in short.
http://jayant7k.blogspot.com/2006/07/document-scoringcalculating-relevance_08.html
--
Anshum Gupta
Naukri Labs!
http://ai-cafe.blogspot.com
The facts expressed here belong to everybody, the op
Hi,
Does Lucene take into consideration anything other than the frequency of
the query words in a document? If it does, what are the other
considerations?
If it is purely based on word frequency, is it appropriate for Internet
based search (where we need to consider reference count also)?
Th
LuSql is a simple but powerful tool for building Lucene indexes from
relational databases. It is a command-line Java application for the
construction of a Lucene index from an arbitrary SQL query of a
JDBC-accessible SQL database. It allows a user to control a number of
parameters, including the SQ
Try Hibernate Search - http://www.hibernate.org/410.html
John G.
-Original Message-
From: ??? [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 3:27 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Lucene Indexing DB records?
Guess I don't quite understand why there are so few
> Actually there are many projects for Lucene + Database. Here is a list I
> know:
>
> * Hibernate Search
> * Compass, (also Hibernate + Lucene)
> * Solr + DataImportHandler (Searching + Crawler)
> * DBSight, (Specific for database, closed source, but very customizable,
> easy to setup)
> * Browse
shopping comparison site, (anonymous per request) got
2.6 Million Euro funding!
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 2:26 AM, ??? <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guess I don't quite understand why there are so few posts about Lucene
> indexing DB records. Searched Markmail, but most of the Lucene+DB p
You might also want to look at Solr and DataImportHandler.
http://lucene.apache.org/solr
http://wiki.apache.org/solr/DataImportHandler
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 2:56 PM, ??? <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guess I don't quite understand why there are so few posts about Lucene
> in
Guess I don't quite understand why there are so few posts about Lucene indexing
DB records. Searched Markmail, but most of the Lucene+DB posts have to do with
lucene index management.
The only thing I found so far is the following, if you have a minute or two:
http://kalanir.blogspot.com
Would a Function Query (ValueSourceQuery, see the
org.apache.lucene.search.function package) work in this case?
-Grant
On May 4, 2008, at 9:35 AM, Vaijanath N. Rao wrote:
Hi Chris,
Sorry for the cross-posting and also for not making clear the
problem. Let me try to explain the problem at
Hi Chris,
Sorry for the cross-posting and also for not making clear the problem.
Let me try to explain the problem at my hand.
I am tying to write a CBIR (Content Based Image Reterival) frame work
using lucene. As each document have entities such as title, description,
author and so on. I a
Vaijanath,
I think I would do things in a different fashion:
Lucene default distance metric is based on tf/idf and the cosine
model, i.e. the frequencies of items. I believe the values that you
are adding as Fields are the values in n-space for each of these
image-based attributes. I don't believe
: Hi Lucene-user and Lucene-dev,
Please do not cross post -- java-user is the suitable place for your
question.
: Obviously there is something wrong with the above approach (as to get the
: correct document we need to get all the documents and than do the required
: distance calculation), but t
Hi Lucene-user and Lucene-dev,
I want to use lucene as an backend for the Image search (Content based
Image retrieval).
Indexing Mechanism:
a) Get the Image properties such as Texture Tamura (TT), Texture Edge
Histogram (TE), Color Coherence Vector (CCV) and Color Histogram (CH)
and Color Co
Hi,
I am very new to Lucene & Hadoop, and I have a project where I need to
use Lucene to index some input given either as a a huge collection of
Java objects or one huge java object.
I read about Hadoop's MapReduce utilities and I want to leverage that feature
in my case described above.
TED]>
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Friday, 26 October, 2007 5:31:36 AM
Subject: Re: lucene indexing doubts
hi,
thanks for your response. I think you hanven't got what my question
is? I
will explain with an example. I have a folder which contains the
indexed
files. so, suppose i
26 okt 2007 kl. 06.31 skrev poojasreejith:
I have a folder which contains the indexed files. so, suppose if i
want to add one more indexed data into it, without deleting the
whole folder and performing the indexing for all the files again.
I want it to do only that one file and add the i
--
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/lucene-indexing-doubts-tf4692435.html#a13420712
Sent from the
25 okt 2007 kl. 19.35 skrev poojasreejith:
Can anyone of you guide me, how to index into an already indexed
folder.
Right now, I am deleting the indexed info and running the indexer
again. I
dont want to do that. I want a method, how to append into the same
folder
when new files are ind
d any solution for it.
Pooja
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/lucene-indexing-doubts-tf4692435.html#a13412076
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [
Thanks very much for the information. I did not include the other portion of
the stack trace because it was totally belonging to Jackrabbit library. Now
I guess the problem is due to the fact that Jackrabbit's latest version is
using Lucene 2.0 for its indexing purposes. So I will search some patch
: I think this bug is related to the one posted on Lucene JIRA:
: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-665
: Please let me know if there is any solution to this bug of Lucene.
note that the issue is "Closed, Resolution: Won't Fix" it was determined
that ultimately there was no bug in Luce
But then the core problem is that the index that is created is in a totally
corrupted state.
So deleting or keeping the lock does not make a difference as the Index
itself is not created properly.
The problem arises when the index is getting created itself.
Regards
Narendra
On 10/8/07, saikrishn
Lucene creates an lock on the index before using it and then unlock the
index, after using it. If the lucene is interuptted and is closed by force
the, index remains in locked state and it cannot be used.
Generally in linux lucene lock information file is create in /tmp directory.
Delete the lock
I think this bug is related to the one posted on Lucene JIRA:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-665
Please let me know if there is any solution to this bug of Lucene.
Thanks
Narendra
On 10/8/07, Joe Attardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/8/07, Narendra yadala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On 10/8/07, Narendra yadala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I do have permission to access Lucene files. They reside on my local
> machine.
> But still this is giving the error.I am using Windows XP operationg
> system.
>
Well, since you are opening an IndexReader (as evidenced by your stack
trace)
1 - 100 of 200 matches
Mail list logo
