Michael:
On 7/28/06, Michael J. Prichard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Howdynot sure if anyone else wants this but here is my first attempt
at writing an analyzer for an email address...modifications, updates,
fixes welcome.
Why reinvent the wheel? See
http://java.sun.com/products/javamail/ja
Doron Cohen/Haifa/[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 28/07/2006 00:18:47:
> For the scoring approach - I don't see an easy way to get the
> counts from the score of the results, although the TF (term
> frequency in candidate docs) is known+used during document
> scoring, and although it seems that the appl
Hi，How about implement multi-key search use lucene, for example use
boolean search exceed 1000 clauses,it will affect the performance
greatly. If use filter or custom sorter to select the result, because
the result is extremely large in amount,so the performance is lower.
Please give me some advic
Oh, yeah, you're hearing a doubtful opinion because if this kind of thing
isn't done exactly correctly, it'd be particularly hard to debug. Keeping
things coordinated is hard ...
Given that you add/remove docs, you really don't want to just modify the
filter. Here's why
All a filter is a bit
Erick wrote:
> Well, I *suppose* you could get the bitset from the pre-existing filter,
> copy it to the bitset for your new filter, and play with the bits at the
> end. I'm not sure how you get rid of your original filter if you use
> CachingWrapperFilter though.
Ok, I'm hearing it's a d
Thank you. The example application is now working as expected.
Sean
Chen Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Please change the "url" to "path" in the result JSP file. coz the field
name that is indexed is called "path" rather than "url".
Cheers,
Chen
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7/28/2006 5:49 P
Thank you. The example application is now working as expected.
Sean
Chen Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Please change the "url" to "path" in the result JSP file. coz the field
name that is indexed is called "path" rather than "url".
Cheers,
Chen
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7/28/2006 5:49 P
Howdynot sure if anyone else wants this but here is my first attempt
at writing an analyzer for an email address...modifications, updates,
fixes welcome.
-- EmailAnalyzer
import java.io.Reader;
import org.apache.lucene.analysis.Analyzer;
import org.apache.lucene.analysis.Lower
I'd really advise getting a copy of Luke to inspect your index as a first
step. I've been surprised a number of times by what really got in my index.
You might also try using a WhitespaceAnalyzer instead of StandardAnalyzer,
that's the most basic analyzer available. I'm not sure whether individua
Ok, there is a patch (http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532). This
is what I saw. But I still have a question. I guess it´s better to ask this
in the hadoop mailing list, anyway, the hadoop project implements a DFS and
the whole MapReduce paradigm. Is it possible to do the indexing and
John john <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 28/07/2006 06:36:19:
> Hello,
>
> I tried to add a field like that
> field = new Field("number", "1",
Field.Store.YES,Field.Index.UN_TOKENIZED);
>
> so i should be indexed and to analyzed? my writer is
> writer = new IndexWriter(INDEX_DIR, new StandardA
You could form a filter, using the WildCardTermEnum or RegExTermEnum and
then use the filter with a ConstantScoreQuery. You lose relevancy, but
relevancy is an ambiguous concept with wildcards anyway.
Using the query parser with a leading wildcard, even if enabled, is almost
sure to give you a "T
"hu andy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 28/07/2006 01:28:14:
> These codes are written in C#,. There is a C# version of Lucene 1.9,
which
I am not a C#'er so I might have misunderstood this code, still, here is my
take;
One general comment - the program sent is not self contained so it's hard
to "
Hello,
I tried to add a field like that
field = new Field("number", "1", Field.Store.YES,Field.Index.UN_TOKENIZED);
so i should be indexed and to analyzed? my writer is
writer = new IndexWriter(INDEX_DIR, new StandardAnalyzer(), true);
but according to the javadoc it should be alright
Hi,
Please change the "url" to "path" in the result JSP file. coz the field
name that is indexed is called "path" rather than "url".
Cheers,
Chen
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7/28/2006 5:49 PM >>>
Hello,
I am trying to use the luceneweb application that is shipped with the
lucene installation. I
Thanx for reply Miles
So, avoiding leading wildcard query was design decision
for sake of efficiency. Thanx for information.
On 7/28/06, Miles Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Pravin Shinde wrote:
> I am trying to use Leading wildcard query, but I am not able to do it.
> Any query with leading w
Pravin Shinde wrote:
I am trying to use Leading wildcard query, but I am not able to do it.
Any query with leading wildcard is failing with lexical error.
query = parser.parse( "*hi" )
JavaError: org.apache.lucene.queryParser.ParseException:
Lexical error at line 1, column 1. Encountered: "*"
Hello,
I am trying to use the luceneweb application that is shipped with the lucene
installation. I have followed the installation instructions and the luceneweb
application has been successfully deployed using Tomcat 5.5.9. However all the
results returned point to http://localhost:8080/l
Hi,
I am trying to use Leading wildcard query, but I am not able to do it.
Any query with leading wildcard is failing with lexical error.
query = parser.parse( "*hi" )
JavaError: org.apache.lucene.queryParser.ParseException:
Lexical error at line 1, column 1. Encountered: "*" (42), after : ""
These codes are written in C#,. There is a C# version of Lucene 1.9, which
can be downloaded from http://www.dotlucene.net
This implements the indexing .
public void CreateIndex()
{
try
{
AddDirectory(directory);
writer.Optimize();
> Yes, I have closed IndexWriter. But it doesn't work.
This is strange...
Can you post a small version of your code that can be executed to show the
problem?
- Doron
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional co
This task reminds me more of a count(*) sql query than a text search query.
Assuming that using a text search engine is a pre requisite, I can think of
two approaches - basing on Lucene scoring as suggested in the question, or
a more simple approach (below).
For the scoring approach - I don't see
22 matches
Mail list logo
