Re: Include BM25 in Lucene?

2006-10-19 Thread Vic Bancroft
Chuck Williams wrote: Vic Bancroft wrote on 10/17/2006 02:44 AM: In some of my group's usage of lucene over large document collections, we have split the documents across several machines. This has lead to a concern of whether the inverse document frequency was appropriate, since the score

Re: Include BM25 in Lucene?

2006-10-17 Thread Vic Bancroft
J.Zhu wrote: If I would like to contribute, what should I do? I am not a good Java developer myself though. Can I work with someone also interested? In some of my group's usage of lucene over large document collections, we have split the documents across several machines. This has lead to

Re: Clustering IndexWriter?

2006-09-21 Thread Vic Bancroft
adasal wrote: Don't be coy, what's your comapany? This URL is derivable from the text, with a little search ening help . . . ** http://www.terracottatech.com/terracotta_spring.shtml more, l8r, v On 21/09/06, Steve Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Warning, I'm a vendor dude but this

Re: Java 1.5 (was ommented: (LUCENE-565) Supporting deleteDocuments in IndexWriter (Code and Performance Results Provided))

2006-07-10 Thread Vic Bancroft
Andi Vajda wrote: On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Doug Cutting wrote: Andi Vajda wrote: On Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Doug Cutting wrote: Since GCJ is effectively available on all platforms, we could say that we will start accepting 1.5 features when a GCJ release supports those features. Does that seem

Re: Java 1.5 (was ommented: (LUCENE-565) Supporting deleteDocuments in IndexWriter (Code and Performance Results Provided))

2006-07-10 Thread Vic Bancroft
robert engels wrote: Seems silly to support 1.5 and not do it this way. Sometimes a little silliness is some serious fun! Just give me a rubber nose, since I am just clowning around trying to build Andi's kewly contrib/db using gcj on the slightly stylish db-4.4.20 and je-3.0.12 . . .

Re: Results (Re: Survey: Lucene and Java 1.4 vs. 1.5)

2006-06-18 Thread Vic Bancroft
Robert Engels wrote: Do you have any hard numbers to support this? The last time I checked, gcj had minimal improvement over JVM 1.5. In terms of speed, there is not much difference between native code and classes (see sample timings). However, the pragmatic availability of java 5

Re: Results (Re: Survey: Lucene and Java 1.4 vs. 1.5)

2006-06-17 Thread Vic Bancroft
Until there is a free java 5 alternative, it would be nice to have a clean compile in 1.4. We might also consider waiting until gcj does the 1.5 move, since some of us are loving the native binaries, particularly on x86_64. How else can you index billions of documents (aside from expensive

gjc compile

2006-06-02 Thread Vic Bancroft
The following diff seemed to help build a nice native binary in my fedora. The first modification makes using the new core archive file name and the second avoids a problematic class . . . [EMAIL PROTECTED] lucene-trunk]$ svn diff Index: src/gcj/Makefile