28 jun 2007 kl. 15.37 skrev Emmanuel Bernard:
I don't really like the idea actually: I'm much comfortable with
having my data in a relational DB :)
If you don't mind, please develop that a bit further.
I think Lucene is suited pretty well for object storage if you also
need it as an
29 jun 2007 kl. 05.08 skrev Daniel Noll:
I just wanted to put the question out in case someone has solved
the exact
same problem already.
I've posted some experiments in the LUCENE-879. The patch replace
delted documents with a new dummy document. The second patch contains
some merge
On 6/29/07, Erick Erickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What do you get if you do a
System.out.println(que.toString())?
And what analyzer are you using?
Erick
On 6/28/07, pratik shinghal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i m using lucene(org.apache.lucene) and i want the java code for parsing
single
Hi,
does anyone knows how to do pagination on jsp page using the number of hits
return? Or any other solutions?
Do provide me with some sample coding if possible or a step by step guide.
Sry if I'm asking too much, I'm new to lucene.
Thanks
Hi,
We are sharing a Lucene index in a Linux cluster over an NFS share. We have
multiple servers reading and writing to the index.
I am getting regular lock exceptions e.g.
Lock obtain timed out:
hi Patrick,
Mike is the expert in this, but until he gets in, can you add details on
the update pattern - note that the DeletionPolicy you describe below is not
(afaik) related to the write lock time-out issues you are facing. The
DeletionPolicy manages better the interaction between an
Hi Doron
Thanks for your reply.
I am working on the details of the update pattern. It will take me
some time as I cannot reproduce the issue on demand.
To answer your other questions, yes, we do have multiple writers. One
writer per node in the cluster.
I will post the results of my
Hi
As requested, I have been trying to improve the logging in the
application so I can give you more details of the update pattern.
I am using the Lucene Index Accessor contribution to co-ordinate the
readers and writers:
Hi
I even tried like this . But I'm not getting any benfifts. How to use
Expert Search can you assist ?
File indexFile = new File(fileName);
FSDirectory dir = FSDirectory.getDirectory(indexFile);
indexSearcher =new IndexSearcher(dir);
Hi
I even tried like this . But I'm not getting any benfifts. How to use
Expert Search can you assist ?
File indexFile = new File(fileName);
FSDirectory dir = FSDirectory.getDirectory(indexFile);
indexSearcher =new IndexSearcher(dir);
This is an interesting choice. Perhaps you have modified
LuceneIndexAccessor, but it seems to me (without knowing much about your
setup) that you would have odd reader behavior. On a 3 node system, if you
add docs with node 1 and 2 but not 3 and your doing searches against all 3
nodes, node 3
Hi Mark
Yes, thank you. I can see your point and I think we might have to pay
some attention to this issue.
But, we sometimes see this error on an NFS share within 2 minutes of
starting the test so I don't think this is the only problem.
Once again, thanks for the idea. I will certainly be
Hey all,
As you can tell by the subject, interested in 'name searching' and
'nearby name' searching. Scenarios include Geneology and
Similar-Person-from-Different-Datasources matchings. Assuming
java-based lucene, and more than likely the Solr project.
*nickname: would it be feasible to create
If your getting java.io.FileNotFoundException:
/mnt/nfstest/repository/lucene/lucene-icm-test-1-0/segments_h75 within 2
minutes, this is very odd indeed. That would seem to imply your deletion
policy is not working.
You might try just using one of the nodes as the writer. In Michaels
Hi Mark
I just ran my test again... and the error occurred after 10 minutes -
which is the time when my deletion policy is triggered. So... I think
you might have found the answer to my problem.
I will spend more time looking at it on Monday.
Thank you very much for your help and enjoy your
You may find this thread useful: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/
lists/lucene/java-user/47824?search_string=record%20linkage;#47824
although it doesn't answer all your ?'s
I think in the end you will need to do post processing on the
results, but maybe not.
On Jun 29, 2007, at 11:41 AM,
After search, you will just get an object Hits, and go through all of the
documents by hits.doc(i).
The pagination is controlled by you. Lucene is pre-caching first 200
documents and lazy loading the rest by batch size 200.
--
Chris Lu
-
Instant Scalable Full-Text Search
I tried to subclass PhraseScorer, but discovered that it's an abstract class
and its subclasses (ExactPhraseScorer and SloppyPhraseScorer) are final
classes. So instead, I extended Scorer with my custom scorer and extended
PhraseWeight (after making it public). My scorer's constructor is passed
Well, I'd suggest the first thing you do is remove your custom
tokenizer and see what results you get with one of the normal parsers.
Then creep up on your custom analyzer bit by bit. Otherwise, it's
almost impossible to figure out what's going on except by
setting breakpoints in your analyzer
: We are sharing a Lucene index in a Linux cluster over an NFS share. We have
: multiple servers reading and writing to the index.
:
: I am getting regular lock exceptions e.g.
: Lock obtain timed out:
:
: Perhaps i'm missing something, but i thought NativeFSLock was not suitable
: for NFS? ... or is is this what lockd provides? (my NFS knowledge is
: very out of date)
Do'h!
I just read the docs for NativeFSLockFactory and noticed the For example,
for NFS servers there sometimes must be a
when i m using normal tokenizers i m getting track as a result and not
getting 9 .
and when i m using this custom analyser and checking the output , i m
getting the right output as track 9 .
but as soon as i use queryparser using the same custom analyser i get only
track and not 9 .
so
I’m currently a bit confused on how to accomplish limiting my search
results in Lucene (v1.4.3 can’t easily upgrade for this project). Hopefully
someone can help point me in the correct direction.
Essentially my application is comprised of several objects, namely User,
Group, and Document
Patrick Kimber wrote:
As requested, I have been trying to improve the
logging in the application so I can give you more
details of the update pattern.
I am using the Lucene Index Accessor contribution
to co-ordinate the readers and writers:
http://www.nabble.com/Fwd%3A-Contribution%3A-
Yonik wrote:
Note that some Solr users have reported a similar issue.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-240
Seems the scenario there is without using native locks? -
i get the stacktrace below ... with useNativeLocks turned off
Mark Miller wrote:
You might try just using one of the nodes as
the writer. In Michaels comments, he always seems
to mention the pattern of one writer many
readers on nfs. In this case you could use
no LockFactory and perhaps gain a little speed there.
One thing I would worry about if
I have two strings -
String1 contains multiple words
String2 contains just 1 word
I need to search my index to find hits where String1 and String2 occur
within a distance slop = d of each other. Order is important. Also,
ideally I would like to do a fuzzy search on String1. Is there some way
Never used the IndexAccessor patch, so I may be
wrong in the following.
No, let's fix it... /;-
Don't mean to wade in over my head here, but just to help out those that
have not used LuceneIndexAccessor.
I am fairly certain that using the LuceneIndexAccessor could easily
create the
I would look at Query getFieldQuery(String field, String queryText) in
QueryParser for inspiration.
feed the two strings, one at a time to the analyzer.
With the results from String1 do something like:
ListSpanQuery clauses = new ArrayListSpanQuery(v.size());
for (int
On 6/29/07, Doron Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that some Solr users have reported a similar issue.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-240
Seems the scenario there is without using native locks? -
i get the stacktrace below ... with useNativeLocks turned off
Yes... but that
You do want to use a QueryFilter. The method you suggest sounds good.
Make a field called group with a term for each group it belongs to, a
field called user with the users it belongs to etc.
QueryFilter will take a query, i.e. group:managers
Pass the Filter to the search method on your
31 matches
Mail list logo
