On Sunday 20 May 2007 19:52, Peter Bloem wrote:
> Thanks for your reply. This is getting me much deeper into the uncharted
> territories of Lucene, especially the area of FieldCaches, but it's also
> piqued my curiosity. Most of what I've been able to find are discussions
> by people that are al
My comments on storing document id's are perhaps based on a misguided
view of lucene, but it's worth investigating. I figured since there's
only one document per id in the document index, instead of executing one
query with n OR clauses, you could execute n queries with a single docId
to get al
Thanks for your reply. This is getting me much deeper into the uncharted
territories of Lucene, especially the area of FieldCaches, but it's also
piqued my curiosity. Most of what I've been able to find are discussions
by people that are already using FieldCache, rather than explanations of
wha
See Paul's e-mail, he's talking about a place I haven't been in Lucene
yet.
Other than that, see below
On 5/19/07, Peter Bloem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ah, now we're getting somewhere. So I run the first query on the
collection index, get a set of collection id's from that. But how do I
On Sunday 20 May 2007 02:49, Peter Bloem wrote:
> Ah, now we're getting somewhere. So I run the first query on the
> collection index, get a set of collection id's from that. But how do I
> use them in the second query on the document index? It should be easy
> enough to retrieve all documents i
Ah, now we're getting somewhere. So I run the first query on the
collection index, get a set of collection id's from that. But how do I
use them in the second query on the document index? It should be easy
enough to retrieve all documents in the returned collections (which is
what I'm after), b
You're right, your index will bloat considerably. In fact, I'm surprised
it's only a factor of 5
The only thing that comes to mind is really a variant on your approach
from your first e-mail. But I wouldn't use document ids because document
IDs can change. So using doc IDs is...er fraught
I'm sorry, I should have explained the intended behavior more clearly.
The basic idea (without the collection fields) is that there are very
simple documents in the index with one content field each. All I do with
this index is a standard search in this text field. To improve the
search result
This seems kind of kludgy, but that may just mean I don't understand
your problem very well.
What is it that you're trying to accomplish? Searching constrained
by topic or groups?
If you're trying to search by groups, search the archive for the
word "facet" or "faceted search".
Otherwise, could
