Hi,
While working with Searcher.Search, I have noticed a difference in
their performance. I have 10 lakh documents and 30 fields in my index. I
have performed three searches using different queries in a sequential
manner. At search time, I used MMapDirectory and index is opened.
*case1: *
Hi, all:
I am Using version 5.5.4, and find can't delete a document via the
IndexWriter.deleteDocuments(term) method.
Here is the test code:
import org.apache.lucene.analysis.core.SimpleAnalyzer;
import org.apache.lucene.document.Document;
import org.apache.lucene.document.Field;
import org.apac
During search, whether Lucene uses FST in .tip file to match against the
terms? How the changes to the index will be updated in FST? Will it be
re-constructed or will it be updated in existing FST?
In case of wildcard and fuzzy queries, Lucene needs to test a large number
of terms. Will FST be use
Hi
SimpleAnalyzer uses LetterTokenizer which divides text at non-letters.
Your add and search methods use the analyzer but the delete method doesn't.
Replacing SimpleAnalyzer with KeywordAnalyzer in your program fixes it.
You'll need to make sure that your id field is left alone.
Good to see a
Thanks, Ian:
You saved my day!
And there is a further question to ask:
Since the analyzer could only be configured through the IndexWriter,
using different
analyzers for different Fields is not possible, right? I only want
this '_id' field to identify
the document in index, so I could update or
Thanks everyone.
For our use case in Rocana Search, we don't use scoring at all. We always
sort by a timestamp field present in every Document, so for us Lucene query
logic is always truly boolean - we only want exact matches using boolean
logic like you would get from a database query.
That bein
Hi
Sounds like you should use FieldType.setTokenized(false). For the
equivalent field in some of my lucene indexes I use
FieldType idf = new FieldType();
idf.setStored(true);
idf.setOmitNorms(true);
idf.setIndexOptions(IndexOptions.DOCS);
idf.setTokenized(false);
idf.freeze();
There's also Per
Regarding whether the filesystem cache helps, you could look at whether
there is some disk activity while your queries are running.
When everything is in the filesystem cache, the latency of search requests
for simple queries (term queries and combinations through boolean queries)
usually mostly d
Le ven. 17 févr. 2017 à 11:17, krish mohan a
écrit :
> During search, whether Lucene uses FST in .tip file to match against the
> terms? How the changes to the index will be updated in FST? Will it be
> re-constructed or will it be updated in existing FST?
>
Lucene never updates existing files.
Thanks Ian,
That's what I needed, things now work like a charm.
someone really should put this in a blog or something :D
good day
2017-02-17 21:16 GMT+08:00 Ian Lea :
> Hi
>
>
> Sounds like you should use FieldType.setTokenized(false). For the
> equivalent field in some of my lucene
Hey, thank you so much. I got it.
I have
- 10 lakh docs, 30 fields in my index
- opening new searcher at initial search and
- there will be no filesystem cache for my current index
At initial search, I search across only one field out of 30 fields in my
index.
My question is,
*At init
Any suggestions Kindly help me to move forward.
Regards,
Chitra
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 9:23 PM, Chitra R wrote:
> Hi,
> Thanks for the suggestion. But in the case of drill sideways
> search, retrieving allDimensions (using Facets.getAllDimension()) threw an
> exception which
Hi, how are you instantiating your MultiFacets? You should be passing
e.g. a LongRangeFacetCounts instance for your "time" dimension, which
should prevent that exception.
For DrillSideways, I think you must subclass, and then override
buildFacetResult to compute your range facets, because that cl
Hey,
I have indexed "author","module_id" fields as
SortedSetDocValuesFacetField and "time", "price","salary" fields as
NumericDocValuesField.
My Category looks like:
*module_id
-> author
*price
module_id and price are parent categories. After selecting any one of the
facets from
Some minimal information about the fields is loaded into memory when you
open the index reader. Things like the list of fields and how they are
indexed.
However the vast majority of the data is read from disk lazily, we do not
warm the filesystem cache or anything like that by default. We do not u
Thanx a lot Adrien.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Adrien Grand wrote:
> Some minimal information about the fields is loaded into memory when you
> open the index reader. Things like the list of fields and how they are
> indexed.
>
> However the vast majority of the data is read from disk laz
i want realize a priorityqueue not limited persistent (not all in memory)
using lucene.
I found on documemtation the class PriorityQueue.
So i ask you clarifications:
1) PriorityQueue work all in memory or not?
2) if i develop on my own a class making a lucine storage where i search by
priority and
Thank you, works like a charm.
18 matches
Mail list logo
