: > imeediately? ... in the totally generic case, this isn't a safe
: This was implemented as an easy way to control the maximum search time
: for typical queries. I'm open for suggestions how to improve it. One
The only thing i can think of that would truely timeout *any* query is a
seperate Ti
On 3/17/07, Chris Hostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ack! ... this is what happens when i only skim a patch and then write with
my odd mix of authority and childlike speling
I'm telling ya, man, ya gotta get Firefox, use Gmail (or at least a
web-interfaced e-mail client) and turn on th
Chris Hostetter wrote:
Ack! ... this is what happens when i only skim a patch and then write with
my odd mix of authority and childlike speling
: * it creates a single (static) timer thread, which counts the "ticks",
: every couple hundred ms (configurable). It uses a volatile int counter,
:
Ack! ... this is what happens when i only skim a patch and then write with
my odd mix of authority and childlike speling
: * it creates a single (static) timer thread, which counts the "ticks",
: every couple hundred ms (configurable). It uses a volatile int counter,
: therefore avoiding the
: > this is something anyone using the Lucene API can do as long as they use a
: > HitCollector ... the Nutch impl seems to ctually spin up a seperate thread
: >
:
: I'm keen to understand the pros and cons of these two approaches.
to clarify, it's really just one approach, with an extension: Nut
markharw00d wrote:
Chris Hostetter wrote:
this is something anyone using the Lucene API can do as long as they
use a
HitCollector ... the Nutch impl seems to ctually spin up a seperate
thread
I'm keen to understand the pros and cons of these two approaches.
With the HitCollector approach
17 mar 2007 kl. 10.07 skrev markharw00d:
Chris Hostetter wrote:
this is something anyone using the Lucene API can do as long as
they use a
HitCollector ... the Nutch impl seems to ctually spin up a
seperate thread
I'm keen to understand the pros and cons of these two approaches.
With t
Chris Hostetter wrote:
this is something anyone using the Lucene API can do as long as they use a
HitCollector ... the Nutch impl seems to ctually spin up a seperate thread
I'm keen to understand the pros and cons of these two approaches.
With the HitCollector approach is this just engineer
: Nutch recently added a search query timeout (NUTCH-308). Are there any
: plans to add such functionality to the Lucene HitCollector directly? Or
: is there some reason that this is a bad idea?
Quickly skimming the patch in that Issue, Nutch seems to have done what
has been discussed previousl
You could do it asynchronously. That is, separate off the actually
lucene search into a different thread which does the actual search, then
the calling thread simply waits for a maximum time for the search thread
to complete, then queries the status of the search thread to get the
results obtained
On Thursday 07 July 2005 16:06, Dan Armbrust wrote:
> Has anyone ever written code to make it possible to return from a
> search, after a given amount of time, returning the results that have
> been collected so far (but not necessarily all of them)?
>
> The only thing that I can see to do throu
11 matches
Mail list logo
