MergeFactor and MergeDocs are left at default values. The indexing is
incremental, i.e. whenever someone adds or modifys a file to in svn
repository, the lucene index is updated, and the writer/reader/searcher
are refreshed (closed and opened again).,
According to the svn logs for the time the
Thanks Mark for the explanation. I think your solution would definitely
change the tf-idf scoring for documents since your field is now split up
over multiple docs. One option to get around the changing scoring would be
to to run a completely separate index for highlighting (with the overlapping
d
These files are normal Lucene segment files (in compound file
format). What's odd is that Lucene is not merging them down to a
smaller set of segments.
Have you done any advanced things, like customize the deletion or
merge policy?
When you close you writer, are you using just close()
How are you using the score? The fact that you want them back to the
old way implies to me that you are using them for something other than
for sorting the results.
On Jan 29, 2009, at 8:21 PM, AlexElba wrote:
Hello,
I have project which I am trying to switch from lucene 2.3.2 to 2.4
I
I presume they are both now slower, right? Otherwise you wouldn't
mind the speedup on the bigger one. Hits did caching and prefetched
things, which has it's tradeoffs. Can you describe how you were
measuring the queries? How many results were you getting?
-Grant
On Feb 3, 2009, at 8:
OK thanks for bringing closure.
Mike
John Byrne wrote:
No I'm not messing with the delete or merge policy - but I think I
know what went wrong though...
We have 2 instances of the application, for failover. They are never
supposed to be active at the same time, but I just discovered a
Hmm... this is not in fact considered a fatal error to
addIndexesNoOptimize. If you were to optimize(), you would then see an
exception thrown.
Here's why: when addIndexesNoOptimize runs, it simply appends the
imported segment description to the internal SegmentInfos and then
asks the MergePolic
No I'm not messing with the delete or merge policy - but I think I know
what went wrong though...
We have 2 instances of the application, for failover. They are never
supposed to be active at the same time, but I just discovered a
condition that can cause exactly that to happen. When we detec
Hi,
I've been looking into the FieldCache API because of memory problems
we've been seeing in our production environment.
We use various different sorts so over time the cache builds up and
servers stop responding.
I decided to apply the patch for JIRA 831:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse
Todd Benge wrote:
Hi,
I've been looking into the FieldCache API because of memory problems
we've been seeing in our production environment.
We use various different sorts so over time the cache builds up and
servers stop responding.
I decided to apply the patch for JIRA 831:
https://issues.ap
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
> Todd Benge wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've been looking into the FieldCache API because of memory problems
>> we've been seeing in our production environment.
>>
>> We use various different sorts so over time the cache builds up and
>> servers stop
Todd Benge wrote:
The intent is to reduce the amount of memory that is held in cache. As it
is now, it looks like there is an array of comparators for each index
reader. Most of the data in the array appears to be the same for each cache
so there is duplication for each type ( string, float).
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
> Todd Benge wrote:
>
>>
>> The intent is to reduce the amount of memory that is held in cache. As it
>> is now, it looks like there is an array of comparators for each index
>> reader. Most of the data in the array appears to be the same for
Hi every body:
I am using wordnet to index my document taking in account the synonyms
with wordnet.
After I indexed the whole documents collections I made a query with
the word "snort" but documents that contain the word bird are
retrieved, I don't understand this because snort and bird are not
sy
The first thing I'd do is get a copy of luke (google lucene luke) and
examine your index to see what's actually there in the document
you claim in incorrectly returned. If that doesn't
enlighten you, you really have to provide more details and code
examples, because your question is unanswerable as
Well, I have the luke 0.8, I opened my index with that tool but there is not
any clue of synonyms in the field I have indexed with the synonym analyzer.
I don't know how can I see the group of synonyms of each term, sould
somebody tell me hot to do that ???
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Erick
How can I see the senses of a word with wordnet ??? And How could I select
the most populars ???
Is there a way to make queries ignoring the synonyms I have added to the
index ???
I hope you can help me.
Regards
Ariel
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Manu Konchady wrote:
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 4/
Hi,
As I was reading the post "Re: TopDocCollector vs Hits: TopDocCollector
slowing", I just got curious on how he explained his change from Hits to
TopDocCollector. I'm assuming that the Hits is returned from a call of:
Searcher searcher = new Searcher();
searcher.search(xxx, xxx) - that wil
18 matches
Mail list logo
