People (including me) use Lucene to page through results all the time,
so I'm pretty sure you're OK.
so here's my answers...
(1) yes.
(2) Well, the default sort is by score so if you want some other
ordering you have to sort.
(3) You can boost things at index time, but I don't think that's at all
relevant. What order are you trying to enforce that you know
enough about at index time to specify?
Do note, though, that Hits is deprecated. The problem is that
Hits was intended to be reasonable *only* when accessing the first
few documents. If you're paging far into the result set, be aware that
using Hits will re-execute the entire query every 100 (200?) results you
throw away. Think about one of the HitCollectors
(perhaps TopDocCollector) instead.
Best
Erick
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 1:01 PM, <bill.che...@sungard.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a few questions about the ordering of search results:
>
> 1) Given a query, are the Documents contained in the Hits object that is
> returned by IndexSearcher.search(Query query) guaranteed to be in the
> same order from one call to the next (assuming the index has not been
> updated in the meantime)?
> 2) Assuming I don't use the IndexSearcher.search(Query query, Sort sort)
> method, is the ordering of Documents in the Hits object predictable at
> all?
> 3) Short of using the IndexSearcher.search(Query query, Sort sort), is
> there any way to influence the ordering of the Documents in the Hits
> object? E.g. is there anything that I can do when creating and/or
> updating the index that will guarantee a certain ordering of results at
> query time?
>
> For what it's worth, we're using Lucene in conjuction w/ a relational
> database. Our index has an 'id' field that maps to a row in a
> relational database table. Since Lucene queries are so quick we've
> found performance to be much better if we do a pure Lucene query to find
> the docs we need then do a simple SQL query with a "where id in (...)"
> clause. We've also wrapped this in an interface that implements a
> relational-like limit/offset functionality. So it's important to us
> that at the very least the query returns results in the same order each
> time. Ideally, we'd like to order the results on a String field we have
> on each document. This actually works, however it slows things down a
> bit. This is understandable, course -- and I'm actually very impressed
> how quickly it does perform -- however, we're trying to squeeze as many
> cycles as possible out it to give the best user experience. Just
> wondering if there is anything else we might try.
>
> thanks,
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
>
>
