ually reset.
Is this intentional behavior? and if so why?
Regards
Hans Lund
Hi all
I'm a bit unsure about the intended function of
the ControlledRealTimeReopenThread in a NRT context - especially regarding
stale times.
As of now if you are waiting for a generation to become refreshed, it looks
like the stale time is either the min stale time or the max stale time. Is
thi
ific
> generation.
>
> This approach is only effective if most searches can just use the
> current searcher, i.e. most searches do not need a specific
> generation. If you truly need "real-time" values for nearly all
> searches then LiveFieldValues might be useful.
&g
I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5461, and
attached a small test that shows the error it a setup similar to what I
would like to run
The 1% is a overestimation - it seems to be related to concurrent commit on
the index writer
Hans Lund
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:
slow)
Any thoughts on what when its ok to call FieldCache.DEFAULT.getTerms? - Or
is this not really in any use anymore?
Regards Hans Lund
what you expect to be
the bottleneck?
Regards
Hans Lund
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Mukul Ranjan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have 150k documents in lucene index folder. It is taking 30-35 minute
> to rebuild the index. We are fetching this data from sql server.
> I have applied be
exOptions=DOCS
So any hints as to why field.fieldType().pointDimensionCount() != 0
and any suggestions what might cause this?
Regards
Hans Lund
dIndexes?
> - customizing merging in some way, eg. by wrapping the merge readers?
>
> Le mar. 4 oct. 2016 à 16:40, Hans Lund a écrit :
>
> > After upgrading to 6.2 we are having problems during merges (after
> running
> > for a while).
> >
&
ommit keeping a number of snapshots
but honoring a max retention period, not that I suspect it to be the cause
- but if fieldinfos from another snapshot is used in the merge that could
cause problems
Hans Lund
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemccandless.com>
binaryDocValueField
with empty ByteRefs for all IndexableField having DocValueType ==
DocValueTypes.NONE.
It works but is not a pretty solution, but is there any alternatives?
/Hans Lund
BinaryDocValueField strategy very
simple;-))
What are the drawbacks of having such a 'marker' docValue having no actual
value?
Hans Lund
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
> Unlike for doc values fields, Lucene does not st
Of cause! Almost too obvious ;-) thx alot - I'll spend some time wondering
why that didn't pop up in my mind as a solution.
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Adrien Grand wrote:
> Le jeu. 8 déc. 2016 à 16:42, Hans Lund a écrit :
>
> > That would be a solution for
Hi All
I'm in the process to upgrade from 2.0 to 2.1, but are missing the
similar contrib (the jar only contains a Manifest). is this a bug or
is that on purpose?
Cheers
Hans Lund
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROT
13 matches
Mail list logo
