Add the common terms such as University, School, Medicine,
Institute etc. to stopwords list, so you are left with Stanford,
Palo Alto etc.
Then use Ahmet's suggestion of using a booleanquery
.setMinimumNumberShouldMatch() to (say) 75% of the query string
length.
Finally, if you wish to be very
On Mar 24, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Shashi Kant wrote:
Add the common terms such as University, School, Medicine,
Institute etc. to stopwords list, so you are left with Stanford,
Palo Alto etc.
I don't know if I would remove them, but you might consider using the
CommonGram or n-gram approach
We upgraded to 2.9.2 from 2.3.2 and the garbage collection performance
deteriorated drastically. The system is going to Full GC cycles with
long pauses very frequently. Did something got changed that we need to
account for?
thanks in advance
-siraj
Hi,
I have a quick question. If I have an index where some text values are
indexed under the same field name, but some are ANALYZED and some are
NOT_ANALYZED, does the last value's flags change the flags for the whole
field name? For instance if I index 3 sentences under a field name as
Hello there,
I am getting exception when running queries with new getDocIdSet() in my
customer filter. Following is the code for my getDocIdSet() function:
/public DocIdSet getDocIdSet(IndexReader reader) throws IOException {
OpenBitSet bitSet = new OpenBitSet(reader.maxDoc());
for
On Mar 24, 2010, at 2:13 PM, Siraj Haider wrote:
We upgraded to 2.9.2 from 2.3.2 and the garbage collection performance
deteriorated drastically. The system is going to Full GC cycles with long
pauses very frequently. Did something got changed that we need to account
for?
Yes, quite a
I don't think so, but a quick way to check would be to look at your
index with a copy of Luke and see what the actual tokens are.
But I'm not sure it matters, I don't think you *can* make things work
out well; your query-time analysis will be...er...difficult. You only
get to specify one analyzer
It was an unexpected coincidence that the two cases ended up with the
same field name. I just changed the one case to index with a different
field name and that fixed my problem. I was still curious though.
Thanks,
Paul
-Original Message-
From:
Is this during indexing or searching?
Mike
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.org wrote:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 2:13 PM, Siraj Haider wrote:
We upgraded to 2.9.2 from 2.3.2 and the garbage collection performance
deteriorated drastically. The system is going to
Apache Lucene EuroCon Call For Participation - Prague, Czech Republic May 20
21, 2010
All submissions must be received by Tuesday, April 13, 2010, 12 Midnight CET/6
PM US EDT
The first European conference dedicated to Lucene and Solr is coming to Prague
from May 18-21, 2010. Apache Lucene
Forwarding to lucene only - the big cross-post caused my gmail filters
to file it.
-Yonik
-- Forwarded message --
From: Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.org
Date: Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 8:03 PM
Subject: Apache Lucene EuroCon Call For Participation: Prague, Czech
Republic May 20 21,
Hi all.
I notice that Filter.getDocIdSet() is now documented as follows:
Note: This method will be called once per segment in
the index during searching. The returned {...@link DocIdSet}
must refer to document IDs for that segment, not for
the top-level reader.
If I look at
Hi all,
I was wondering if anyone is using SOLR successfully in Australia in a
high end high transaction system?
Cheers
Andrew
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
13 matches
Mail list logo
