[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-915?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502233
]
Paul Curren commented on LUCENE-915:
I understand, and thanks for you help.
Incidentally, i'm comparing against
Michael Busch wrote on 04/06/2007 18:59:49:
> So please help testing the release files on
> different platforms with different JVM versions.
For testing purposes I uploaded a current build from the 2.2 branch to
http://people.apache.org/~buschmi/staging_area/lucene/
- Michael
Hello Team,
well, first of all, let's take a deep breath! Behind us are a couple of
busy weeks. I would like to take this chance to thank everyone very much
for the great work! We're on track for our 2.2 release on the 19th of June.
As announced I created a Lucene 2.2 branch today from trunk re
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-915?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Hoss Man resolved LUCENE-915.
-
Resolution: Invalid
> I'd imagine you aren't going to fix it since it would require explicit
> 'exceptio
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-915?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502223
]
Paul Curren commented on LUCENE-915:
I believe like you say that the algorithm is correctly implemented, however
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-915?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502221
]
Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-915:
-
can you elaborate on why you think this is a bug?
This is a fairly basic functi
PorterStemmer is incorrectly truncating words ending in e
-
Key: LUCENE-915
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-915
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Bug
Compon
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-914?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502219
]
Doug Cutting commented on LUCENE-914:
-
The text was mostly trying to describe what the specified implementation d
In hte spirit of improving documentation, i've started a document
summarizing the various comments/ideas about improving out
documentation...
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/Documentation_Improvements
: 3. There is a whole lot of knowledge stored in the email archives,
: how can we leverage
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-902?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502213
]
Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-902:
-
A few comments in no particular order...
1) in future patches, could you please u
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-914?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502186
]
Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-914:
-
ConstantScorer is implemented like:
public boolean skipTo(int target)
Doron Cohen wrote:
Since the patches are in place we might want to commit LUCENE-912 and
LUCENE-913 before?
If there are no objections I plan to commit it later today.
912 and 913 are committed. Great job, Doron! Thank you!
Alright, everything seems to be in place. Good timing! I
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-914?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Doron Cohen updated LUCENE-914:
---
Attachment: lucene-914.patch
patch adds a test to QueryUtils that exposes this issue.
50 test cases i
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-913?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Doron Cohen resolved LUCENE-913.
Resolution: Fixed
Lucene Fields: [Patch Available] (was: [New])
Committed, thanks Michael!
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-913?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Doron Cohen updated LUCENE-913:
---
Attachment: lucene-913.patch
patch attached for future reference, contains:
- Michael's fix
- new te
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Doron Cohen resolved LUCENE-912.
Resolution: Fixed
Committed the original lucene-912.patch by Hoss.
Thanks Hoss and Sudaakeran B. !
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-913?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Sean Timm updated LUCENE-913:
-
Summary: Two consecutive score() calls return different scores for Boolean
Queries. (was: Two consecutiv
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-914?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502162
]
Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-914:
-
The spec text is ambiguous.
The biggest issue is to look if any scorers ac
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-908?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Busch updated LUCENE-908:
-
Fix Version/s: (was: 2.2)
Patch committed. Leaving this issue open for the simplifications su
On 6/6/07, Michael Busch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was just wondering if this behavior is what the average user would
expect from a skipTo() method
without reading the javadocs carefully enough.
skipTo() use isn't for the average user ;-)
This is very inner-loop stuff and should be primaril
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-908?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502156
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-908:
--
As always these are very good recommendations Hoss! I think I will commi
Chris Hostetter wrote:
: But I think it should be the desired behavior for skipTo() to not skip
: at all
: if curDoc==target already? Which means we should clearify the javadocs.
i'm not certain about that ... in theory (given the way the
javadocs are currently written) shouldn't s.skipTo(0) alw
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-914?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502153
]
Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-914:
-
my gut says we should fix the Impls and leave the spec the way it is ... less
ris
Scorer.skipTo(current) remains on current for some scorers
--
Key: LUCENE-914
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-914
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Bug
Comp
: But I think it should be the desired behavior for skipTo() to not skip
: at all
: if curDoc==target already? Which means we should clearify the javadocs.
i'm not certain about that ... in theory (given the way the
javadocs are currently written) shouldn't s.skipTo(0) always be
functionally equi
: The method states 'greater than OR EQUAL TO' so your d1 != d2 test is
: invalid.
:
: It should be assert (d2>=d1)
I think you are missreading Doron's spuedo code (either that or i am) ...
the 'greater than OR EQUAL TO' statement is regarding the current match
and the target (input to skipTo) ..
robert engels wrote:
The method states 'greater than OR EQUAL TO' so your d1 != d2 test is
invalid.
It should be assert (d2>=d1)
Well, but the javadoc says BEYOND the current.
But I think it should be the desired behavior for skipTo() to not skip
at all
if curDoc==target already? Which mean
> The method states 'greater than OR EQUAL TO' so
> your d1 != d2 test is invalid.
>
> It should be assert (d2>=d1)
Yes, the '>=' is regarding to the skip target, I am okay with this.
But "beyond the current" regards to where the scorer is currently
located, ie what doc() would have returned jus
Chris Hostetter wrote:
> skipTo semantics have always made my head hurt, but it may be that the
> contract is expressed too simplisticly ... i believe the expectation is
> that while skipTo should always "skip to the first match beyond the
> current whose document number is greater than or equal t
: Hi, following LUCENE-912, looking closer at skipTo() in
: DisjunctionMaxScorer, it seems not to follow Scorer.skipTo() "contract":
:
: "Skips to the first match beyond the current whose document number is
: greater than or equal to a given target."
:
: It is the "__beyond__ the current" requ
The method states 'greater than OR EQUAL TO' so your d1 != d2 test is
invalid.
It should be assert (d2>=d1)
On Jun 6, 2007, at 6:30 PM, Doron Cohen wrote:
Hi, following LUCENE-912, looking closer at skipTo() in
DisjunctionMaxScorer, it seems not to follow Scorer.skipTo()
"contract":
First off: please don't send questions about *using* the Lucene Java
library to the java-dev list ... it is for discussion about *developing*
the internals of hte Lucene Java API. the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list is for
discussion about *using* the API in your own applications.
If you hav any followup
Hi, following LUCENE-912, looking closer at skipTo() in
DisjunctionMaxScorer, it seems not to follow Scorer.skipTo() "contract":
"Skips to the first match beyond the current whose document number is
greater than or equal to a given target."
It is the "__beyond__ the current" requirement tha
Doron Cohen wrote:
If there are no objections I plan to commit it later today.
+1. Thanks for taking care of these, Doron!
I'm working on LUCENE-908 in parallel. After all three are committed
(908, 912, 913)
I will make the branch.
--
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-913?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Busch updated LUCENE-913:
-
Fix Version/s: 2.2
> Two consecutive score() calls return different scores for Bollean Queries.
>
Michael Busch wrote:
> I haven't branched the trunk yet (I will send a different mail to this
> list afterwards).
> Since the patches are in place we might want to commit LUCENE-912 and
> LUCENE-913 before?
If there are no objections I plan to commit it later today.
On 6/6/07, Michael Busch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I haven't branched the trunk yet (I will send a different mail to this
list afterwards).
Since the patches are in place we might want to commit LUCENE-912 and
LUCENE-913 before?
+1, these are medium-serious bugs with fixes that look unlikely t
: Hmmm, it is all nicely packaged in source, which satisfies the
: discussion you listed below. As for the binary distributions, they
: are pretty much worthless unless you have some way of knowing what
: the dependencies are, right? Or am I missing something?
I would assume so, but i don't use
Hmmm, it is all nicely packaged in source, which satisfies the
discussion you listed below. As for the binary distributions, they
are pretty much worthless unless you have some way of knowing what
the dependencies are, right? Or am I missing something?
On Jun 6, 2007, at 5:45 PM, Chris H
Doron Cohen wrote:
Michael, is there a need to hold commits to trunk while
the new branch is created?
No, normal trunk development may continue as usual.
(This is with LUCENE-912 and LUCENE-913 in mind - I think
they can wait for 2.3, there would always be new issues.)
I haven't bra
> --> Feature freeze from Wednesday (06/06)
>
> All features must be checked in by end of Tuesday. On Wednesday I will
Michael, is there a need to hold commits to trunk while
the new branch is created?
(This is with LUCENE-912 and LUCENE-913 in mind - I think
they can wait for 2.3, there would al
Two consecutive score() calls return different scores for Bollean Queries.
--
Key: LUCENE-913
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-913
Project: Lucene - Java
: I feel like I am forgetting something with all the emails flying
: around about packaging, but don't the contrib jars also need their
: libs packaged with them in the binary distribution? Or at least a
: way to specify what they are and where to get them? They are there
: in the source distrib
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Doron Cohen reassigned LUCENE-912:
--
Assignee: Doron Cohen
> DisjunctionMaxScorer.skipTo has bug that keeps it from skipping
> -
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502121
]
Doron Cohen commented on LUCENE-912:
Actually I changed my mind (and saw your reply just before clicking "Ad
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502120
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-912:
--
Yes I agree. Keeping the score in BooleanScorer until next() or skipTo()
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502111
]
Doron Cohen commented on LUCENE-912:
This would recompute, but correctly.
If this fix is just for sanity, ie mai
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-908?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502104
]
Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-908:
-
A couple of random thoughts...
1) macro's can take multiple optional named tags
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Busch updated LUCENE-912:
-
Attachment: lucene-912.patch
In BooleanScorer2.score() the coordinator is initialized: coordinato
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Doron Cohen updated LUCENE-912:
---
Attachment: checkTwoCallsToScore.patch
Updating checkTwoCallsToScore.patch (unintended comment out
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Doron Cohen updated LUCENE-912:
---
Attachment: checkTwoCallsToScore.patch
Attached adds to QueryUtils.check(Query q1, Searcher s):
- sco
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-908?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Busch updated LUCENE-908:
-
Attachment: lucene-908.patch
In addition to Hoss' great patch this one:
- changes the MANIFEST f
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502054
]
Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-912:
-
Yes, two calls to score() should yield the same score.
What scorer was bro
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502048
]
Doron Cohen commented on LUCENE-912:
> dismax score calculation isn't incremental... it's all done during the cal
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-908?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502040
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-908:
--
> * manifest file in any of gdata's jars/war (it doesn't use the
> cont
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502011
]
Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-912:
-
> I'm not sure, but the patch allows to increment all generators right aft
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project lucene-java has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue affects
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project lucene-java has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue affects
Hi All,
I am a lucene developer. i saw your benchmark in lucene website
http://lucene.apache.org
I have records upto 45 GB.when i compress the record it goes to 80
GB.howcan i compress to 10 GB or lower than that.
please help me in this regards.
i have send you the source code that i u
I feel like I am forgetting something with all the emails flying
around about packaging, but don't the contrib jars also need their
libs packaged with them in the binary distribution? Or at least a
way to specify what they are and where to get them? They are there
in the source distributi
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-905?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Grant Ingersoll resolved LUCENE-905.
Resolution: Fixed
Lucene Fields: (was: [New])
Fixed
> left nav of docs/index.html
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-912?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12501827
]
Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-912:
-
I'm not sure, but the patch allows to increment all generators right after
62 matches
Mail list logo
