I am using, Netbeans and want to run some of the Junit test examples from there
I have added the Test programs to a test packages in the project
window and try to run it
but it fails to run.
I have also included libs to the libraries
thanks a lot
Seid M.
--
"RABI ZIDNI ILMA"
There is quite a bit of litterature available on this topic. This paper
presents a summary. Nothing immediately applicable I'm afraid.
Retrieving OCR Text: A survey of current approaches
Steven M. Beitzel, Eric C. Jensen, David A Grossman
Illinois Institute of Technology
It lists a number of othe
Forgot to mention that the previous code that i sent was related to facet
search. This is a general search method I have implemented (they can
probably be combined...).
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Amin Mohammed-Coleman wrote:
> Hi
> I have modified my search code. Here is the following:
>
Hi
I have modified my search code. Here is the following:
[code]
public Summary[] search(SearchRequest searchRequest)
throwsSearchExecutionException {
String searchTerm = searchRequest.getSearchTerm();
if (StringUtils.isBlank(searchTerm)) {
throw new SearchExecutionException("Search string ca
Shooot... The category type was stored by the not indexed! :teeth:
The moment I flipped the flag of categoryType field to analyzed. I was able
to pull the results.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/TermsFilter-Usage-Question-tp22230841p22231549.html
Sent from the Lu
Yep. I searchcriteria and the category type value exists for a given
document.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/TermsFilter-Usage-Question-tp22230841p22231524.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
Probably a silly question, but are you *also* sure that you
have documents with catetoryType:xyz AND the
values you are asking for in searchCriteria? I'd guess
that you could also check this out in Luke with a simple
+contests:blah +categoryType:xyz as a quick
sanity check.
The other thing it'd be
This looks pretty good, the search is always looking in
your "basketName" field unless the searchBox.getText() returns
something like "field:value".
What behavior are you seeing (or not seeing that you expect)?
You might try creating your index as an FSDirectory
then getting a copy of Luke to exa
Why is this code not returning any results?
//Create the query and search
QueryParser queryParser = new QueryParser("contents", new
StandardAnalyzer());
Query query = queryParser.parse(searchCriteria);
Hi,
Getting started shows how to index files. It does not have an example of
how to index how to index a list of objects. I was able to create an
index for the list of objects.
How do I retrieve a list of objects that match the query ?
// Create Index
Directory di
Sure:
http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_4_0/gettingstarted.html
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Ambati, Ravi BGI SF
wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I have a list of java objects and would like to index the contents of
> those objects. And would like to update the index whenever list of
> objects is changed.
>
All,
I have a list of java objects and would like to index the contents of
those objects. And would like to update the index whenever list of
objects is changed.
The big question is when users searches for something in index, I would
like to get all the objects that matached that search string.
I don't know of anyone doing work on it in the Lucene community. My
understanding to date is that it is not really worth trying, but that
may in fact be an outdated view. I haven't stayed up on the
literature on this subject, so background info on what you are
interested in would be help
Hi All:
Is there any study / research done on using scanned paper documents as
images (may be PDF), and then use some OCR or other technique for
extracting text, and the resultant index quality?
Thanks in advance,
Sithu D Sudarsan
sithu.sudar...@fda.hhs.gov
sdsudar...@ualr.edu
You can generate n-grams: for example when you index "lucene" you
create tokens "luce", "ucen", "cene".
It will increase term count (and index size), however on search you
will simply search for a single term, which will be extremely fast.
It depends how may documents you have, size of each docum
Would any one please help me with this.
Thanks
On 23/02/2009, Dino Korah wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> I have a question on normalisation.
> I am using a prehistoric version of lucene; 2.0.0
>
> Context: http://markmail.org/message/z5lcz2htjvqsscam
>
> I have these two scenario with indexes.
> One:
> 2 i
There is an option to turn leading wildcards on, see QueryParser.
All the usual caveats about TooManyClauses apply
Best
Erick
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 7:59 AM, wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We have a business requirement that needs Lucene to search similar to
> contains (of SQL) such that we can h
Hi
Thanks for your help. I will modify my facet search and my other code to
use the recommendations. Would it be ok to get a review of the completed
code? I just want to make sure that I'm not doing anything that may cause
any problems (threading, memory).
Cheers
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 1:10
Reconstructing a field from an index is
1> slow
2> lossy (what about stemmed words? stopwords? )
UNLESS you have stored the data (Field.Store.YES/COMPRESS),
in which case you can just get the field from each index and put it
in the new one. Tokenization has little to do with this although you
coul
See below -- this is an excerpt from the upcoming Lucene in Action
revision (chapter 10).
It's a simple class. Use it like this for searching:
IndexSearcher searcher = manager.get();
try {
searcher.search(...).
...render results...
} finally {
manager.release(searcher);
s
Hi all,
We have a business requirement that needs Lucene to search similar to
contains (of SQL) such that we can have something like *ucen* which
should return lucene and lucent ... unfortunately wildcards are not
allowed at the start of the search keyword - how should I go about this?
Is thi
Hi,
I have two indexes, each has a tokenized field and I would like to combine
them both into one field in a new index.
How can it be done?
(Is it a good approach or is it better to hold them as untokenized text and
only when I create the new index, then to tokenize it?)
Many thanks,
Liat
Hi,
I have two indexes, each has a tokenized field and I would like to combine
them both into one field in a new index.
How can it be done?
(Is it a good approach or is it better to hold them as untokenized text and
only when I create the new index, then to tokenize it?)
Many thanks,
Liat
Also: what sorts of stored fields are you storing? Binary?
Compressed? Text with unicode characters? Roughly how many stored
fields per document?
Mike
vivek sar wrote:
Hi,
We ran into the same issue (corrupted index) using Lucene 2.4.0.
There was no outage or system reboot - not su
The exception you hit during optimize indicates some corruption in the
stored fields file (_X.fdt). Then, the exception hit during
CheckIndex was different -- the postings entry (_r0y.frq) for term
"desthost:wir" was supposed to have 6 entries but had 0.
Did "CheckIndex -fix" allow you to optim
Hi
Thanks for your reply. Without sound completely ...silly...how do i go
abouts using the methods you mentioned...
Cheers
Amin
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Michael McCandless <
luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>
> Actually, it's best to use IndexReader.incRef/decRef to track the
> Index
Actually, it's best to use IndexReader.incRef/decRef to track the
IndexReader.
You should not rely on GC to close your IndexReader since this can
easily tie up resources (eg open file descriptors) for too long.
Mike
Michael Stoppelman wrote:
If another thread is executing a query with t
Hi
Thanks for your reply. I have modified the code to the following:
public Map getFacetHitCount(String searchTerm) {
QueryParser queryParser =
newMultiFieldQueryParser(FieldNameEnum.fieldNameDescriptions(),
analyzer);
Query baseQuery = null;
try {
if (!StringUtils.isBlank(searchTerm)) {
ba
28 matches
Mail list logo
