Peter, which filter do you use, do you respect the IndexReaders maxDoc() and the docBase?
simon On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Peter Keegan <peterlkee...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think the Filter's docIdSetIterator is using the top level reader for each > segment, because the cardinality of the DocIdSet from which it's created is > the same for all readers (and what I expect to see at the top level. > > Peter > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Michael McCandless < > luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > >> That doesn't sound good. >> >> Though, in searchWithFilter, we seem to ask for the Query's scorer, >> and the Filter's docIdSetIterator, using the same reader (which may be >> toplevel, for the legacy case, or per-segment, for the normal case). >> So I'm not [yet] seeing where the issue is... >> >> Can you boil it down to a smallish test case? >> >> Mike >> >> On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Peter Keegan <peterlkee...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > I'm having a problem with 'searchWithFilter' on Lucene 2.9.1. The Filter >> > wraps a simple BitSet. When doing a 'MatchAllDocs' query with this >> filter, I >> > get only a subset of the expected results, even accounting for deletes. >> The >> > index has 10 segments. In IndexSearcher->searchWithFilter, it looks like >> the >> > scorer is advancing to the filter's docId, which is the index-wide value, >> > but the scorer is using the segment-relative value. If I optimize the >> index, >> > I get the expected results. >> > Does this look like a bug? >> > >> > Peter >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
