Mr. Elschot: > In what way is your problem similar?
same: (1) large document spaces (millions); (2) searches at intersection of AND with one side of the AND sporting only a few matches, and the other side sporting large match sets. different: (3) greater variety of data types Alberto S albertos_at_optimus-corp_dot_com -----Original Message----- From: Paul Elschot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 1:04 AM To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: query behavior On Tuesday 27 September 2005 01:13, Chris Hostetter wrote: > > I *believe* that because of the ConjunctionScorer in 1.9, > [...] > to score things that the un-common clause has allready given a score of 0.0. ConjunctionScorer is already used in 1.4 for boolean queries with only required clauses. > > : > : <quote> > : --------------------------------- > : Tue, 06 Jan 2004 > : [...] > : I have a index with documents that have only 2 fields, the first > : (unique) is 'very unique', in that most document have at least > somewhat > : varying terms, the second is a boolean that contains only (boolean) > : 'true' or 'false'. The index contains 100,000,000+ documents. > : If I perform the following search "+unique:somevalue +boolean:true', > : lucene with search on the first term, returning very few documents, > but > : then it will search the second term, returning possibly a million+ > : documents, then it will intersect the list, return 'hits' of only a > few > : documents. > : [. . .] > : This behavior has been observed with the 1.3 final code. > : Robert Engels > : --------------------------------- > : </quote> > : > : Can anyone tell me if that is still true for 1.4? Or if there are > any > : optimizations that is possible to hardcode in such a case (I have a > : similar problem). The ConjunctionScorer in 1.4 will do this optimization in the case of a query with only required clauses. In what way is your problem similar? The development version has "similar" facilities for required/optional and required/excluded queries. Regards, Paul Elschot. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
