On Wednesday 30 August 2006 01:33, Doug Cutting wrote:
eks dev wrote:
Hi commiters, any chance of getting rid of BitSet in Filter? Can somebody
guide what else needs to be done to have it commited, we have a pair of hands
to help...
I'm looking at:
Paul,
my offer is valid, please shout if and where you need some help, test cases...
not t skilled with deep Lucene internals, but could help at least in API
view...
..
At the moment I don't remember what the FIXME's are about, so I'll
need a bit of time getting back into it.
Once
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 21:08, eks dev wrote:
Paul,
my offer is valid, please shout if and where you need some help, test
cases... not t skilled with deep Lucene internals, but could help at
least in API view...
Well, I just posted a single patch file, and I'd like to know whether
PM
Subject: LUCENE-584, was Combining search steps without re-searching
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 21:08, eks dev wrote:
Paul,
my offer is valid, please shout if and where you need some help, test
cases... not t skilled with deep Lucene internals, but could help at
least in API view
-dev@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, 30 August, 2006 9:49:41 PM
Subject: LUCENE-584, was Combining search steps without re-searching
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 21:08, eks dev wrote:
Paul,
my offer is valid, please shout if and where you need some help, test
cases... not t skilled
On 8/30/06, Paul Elschot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I just posted a single patch file, and I'd like to know whether this
patch applies cleanly. The patch itself has 841 lines and affects 11 files,
so be careful, perhaps to the point of starting a new working copy.
FWIW, I usually check
On 8/28/06, Chuck Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I presume your search steps are anded, as in typical drill-downs?
Not necessarily. The result set can also be enlarged by OR very often.
We would also need to add more span clauses to span queries, besides
combining them
with boolean queries.
eks dev wrote:
Hi commiters, any chance of getting rid of BitSet in Filter? Can somebody guide what else needs to be done to have it commited, we have a pair of hands to help...
I'm looking at:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584
And it doesn't yet look like a no-brainer to
Hello,
We think we would have a problem if we try to use lucene because we
do search combinations which might have hundreds of steps, so creating
a combined query and executing again each time might be a problem.
What would entail overhauling Lucene to do search combinations by
taking
Please elaborate.
On Aug 28, 2006, at 6:21 AM, Fernando Mato Mira wrote:
Hello,
We think we would have a problem if we try to use lucene because we
do search combinations which might have hundreds of steps, so creating
a combined query and executing again each time might be a problem.
What
I presume your search steps are anded, as in typical drill-downs?
From a Lucene standpoint, each sequence of steps is a BooleanQuery of
required clauses, one for each step. To add a step, you extend the
BooleanQuery with a new clause. To not re-evaluate the full query,
you'd need some query
Chuck Williams wrote:
I presume your search steps are anded, as in typical drill-downs?
From a Lucene standpoint, each sequence of steps is a BooleanQuery of
required clauses, one for each step. To add a step, you extend the
BooleanQuery with a new clause. To not re-evaluate the full query,
Andrzej Bialecki wrote on 08/28/2006 09:19 AM:
Chuck Williams wrote:
I presume your search steps are anded, as in typical drill-downs?
From a Lucene standpoint, each sequence of steps is a BooleanQuery of
required clauses, one for each step. To add a step, you extend the
BooleanQuery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Monday, 28 August, 2006 10:51:40 PM
Subject: Re: Combining search steps without re-searching
Andrzej Bialecki wrote on 08/28/2006 09:19 AM:
Chuck Williams wrote:
I presume your search steps are anded, as in typical drill-downs?
From
On Monday 28 August 2006 23:17, eks dev wrote:
you are right Chuck, it depends... Filters are great for fields with small
cardinality (majority of terms in normal collection) or things that are
sorted (assuming Paul's patch gets commited so we do not use BitSet and we
could use less memory
15 matches
Mail list logo
