On Saturday 25 June 2005 04:26, jian chen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think Span query in general should do more work than simple Phrase
> query. Phrase query, in its simplest form, should just try to find all
> terms that are adjacent to each other. Meanwhile, Span query does not
> necessary be adjacent t
On Saturday 25 June 2005 02:10, Lokesh Bajaj wrote:
> 3] Does this seem like a JVM issue? Since its always pointing to a
> native method, I am not really sure what to look for or debug.
Does you JVM have enough heap (e.g. -Xmx500M)? Java gets slow if it's busy
with garbage collection.
Regards
At 03:42 PM 6/24/2005 -0400, you wrote:
On Jun 24, 2005, at 2:54 PM, John Fereira wrote:
Last month there was a brief thread about changing the implicit
conjuction for search terms from an OR to AND with a response that
the API provides a setOperator method for doing so.
A site I am developi
On Saturday 25 June 2005 13:59, John Fereira wrote:
> Was there someplace that I should have looked to determine that
> qp.parse(String) would call the non-static method but qp.parse(String,
> String, Analyzer) would not?
Your IDE should have warned you about that. If it didn't, try Eclipse.
Reg
As long as you use the same Searcher object, you shouldn't see document
ids changing.
When you open a searcher you get a consistent view of the segments that
existed at the time. Merging creates new segments which you won't see
until you create a new searcher.
In short, retrieving hits whi
On Jun 25, 2005, at 7:59 AM, John Fereira wrote:
Aha! Look at the method signature of your parse() call. That is the
culprit. To call the non-static method so that you use the
*instance* of QueryParser rather than the default settings, change to
this:
query = qp.parse(searchterms);
Th
I have been browsing the archives concerning this particular topic.
I'm in the same boat and the customer has clustering requirements.
To give some background:
I have a constant flow of incoming messages flying over the network that
need to be archived in db, indexed and dispatched to thousand
Hi,
> From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For a domain-centric identifier, use a custom field to store
> (and index perhaps?) it. Lucene's Document id's are internal
> and not controllable.
Unfortunately Lucene contains API that strongly attached to internal id :(
For example -
At 02:42 PM 6/25/2005 +0200, Daniel Naber wrote:
On Saturday 25 June 2005 13:59, John Fereira wrote:
> Was there someplace that I should have looked to determine that
> qp.parse(String) would call the non-static method but qp.parse(String,
> String, Analyzer) would not?
Your IDE should have war
: Is this the best way to do this? Is there a way to store location
: information associated with each term within a field? Note that there can
: be thousands of documents containing thousands of pages.
It depends on what's important to you.
(FYI: i'm document with "file" in the rest of this m
: The simple question - I have a document and I add it into index with
: TermVector support.
: How can I simply retrive the TermVector information for the document?
:
: TermFreqVector vector = reader.getTermFreqVector(document)?
: reader.delete(document);
: Etc..
Open an IndexReader,
On Jun 25, 2005, at 5:13 PM, John Fereira wrote:
At 02:42 PM 6/25/2005 +0200, Daniel Naber wrote:
On Saturday 25 June 2005 13:59, John Fereira wrote:
> Was there someplace that I should have looked to determine that
> qp.parse(String) would call the non-static method but qp.parse
(String,
12 matches
Mail list logo
