Hi,
I have an existing index from v.2.2 that I populated with documents that had
Fields before NumericField was created. I'm upgrading my program to v3.0,
and I'd like to change my RangeQuery to use the NumericRangeQuery or
NumericRangeFilter. Here is how I stored my fields:
document.ad
Understand. Thanks for the information.
-Original Message-
From: Robert Muir [mailto:rcm...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 6:59 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: MoreLikeThis Interface changes
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Scott Smith wrote:
> I'm updat
Hi Jason
Thank you for the quick reply. This is exactly what I was looking for =D
One more question tho, NumericRangeQuery says the class is equivalent to
NumbericRangeFilter functionally. Is there any preference between the two?
thanks
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Sendros, Jason <
jason.se
Balaji - first, you should e-mail this to the solr-user list, not the java-user
list since this is Solr-specific.
Next step is to use Solr's debugQuery facility (append debugQuery=true to your
request) in order to get the scoring explanations. That'll tell you in gory
detail how the scores are
Hi all
I have a Dynamic "String Single" field present in my SOLR . but when I do
a Query time boosting to that field it doesnt seem to honor it , Below I
have mentioned all the QF parameters that are sent along
qf=body^4&qf=tags_h1^0.1&qf=tags_h2_h3^0.1&qf=tags_h4_h5_h6^0.1&qf=tags_inline^0.
hi all,
I need to create analyzer and I need to choose what parser to use.
can anyone recommend ?
JFlex
javacc
antlr
thanks.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: jav
Storing the date as a long and then searching with NumericRangeQuery will
provide you with exactly what you're looking for. This is an efficient search
solution for numeric data.
Optimize() will reduce the size of your index and improve search time at the
cost of a large burst of overhead. Unle
Hi all
I have some questions about how I should store timestamps.
>From my readings, I can see two ways of indexing timestamps:
DateTools (which uses formated timestamp strings) and
NumericUtils (which uses a long?).
I'm not sure which one gives more performance in my scenario:
For each of my do
On 22/09/2011 13:57, Paul Taylor wrote:
On 22/09/2011 11:56, Paul Taylor wrote:
Id made just a few changes to my code to remove deprecations that
ocurred when I upgraded to Lucene 3.1, all tests work fine but when I
tried to build a real index it gives this error during optimization
stage
Ex
On Sep 22, 2011, at 4:59 AM, Ian Lea wrote:
>> I am not analyzing the title
>>
>> Field titleField = new Field("title", article.getTitle(),Field.Store.YES,
>> Field.Index.NOT_ANALYZED);
>
> OK. But the output you quote says "no match on required clause
> (title:List of newspapers in New York)
On 22/09/2011 13:53, Michael McCandless wrote:
The OverlappingLockExc sounds like somehow you are trying to open two
writers at once on the same index. Maybe try to boil down your code
to a smaller test case?
Hi Mike
Just missed your reply please see my latest reply, I am opening two
writers
On 22/09/2011 11:56, Paul Taylor wrote:
Id made just a few changes to my code to remove deprecations that
ocurred when I upgraded to Lucene 3.1, all tests work fine but when I
tried to build a real index it gives this error during optimization stage
Exception in thread "main" java.nio.channels
The OverlappingLockExc sounds like somehow you are trying to open two
writers at once on the same index. Maybe try to boil down your code
to a smaller test case?
What OS/filesystem? It's odd to get the "File too large" error. I do
wish Lucene would somehow decorate IOEs with the filename.
Id made just a few changes to my code to remove deprecations that
ocurred when I upgraded to Lucene 3.1, all tests work fine but when I
tried to build a real index it gives this error during optimization stage
Exception in thread "main" java.nio.channels.OverlappingFileLockException
at
sun
Thanks Ian, I found it a couple of hours back. Now Trying to figure out
the code flow. Debugging has never been this insightful :)
Regards,
Darshan Pandit
From: Ian Lea
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Date: 22-09-2011 14:31
Subject:Re: Custom Score-Similarity
http://lucen
http://lucene.apache.org/java/3_4_0/scoring.html would be a good place to start.
--
Ian.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 4:49 PM, wrote:
> Hi,
> I need some insight into the how the document matching actually happens
> and how score is generated.
> The basic need driving this desire is to search on m
> I am not analyzing the title
>
> Field titleField = new Field("title", article.getTitle(),Field.Store.YES,
> Field.Index.NOT_ANALYZED);
OK. But the output you quote says "no match on required clause
(title:List of newspapers in New York)" so something is out of synch
somewhere.
What does Luke
Hi
The link to the facet javadocs was not added to the release artifacts by
mistake, however they do exist in this URL:
http://lucene.apache.org/java/3_4_0/api/contrib-facet/index.html.
I've already fixed it, so in the next release it should be ok.
Shai
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Em wro
Hi,
I just saw that this is about Lucene, not Solr. So I am sorry for giving
a Solr-advice on a Lucene-topic.
Shai, I just found the Facet-Contribution's API via Google. Where are
references to that API? I can not find them in Lucene's Wiki or at the
Lucene-page.
I'd like to read a little bit mo
Hi Mihai,
thanks for clarifying the question. The facet module supports that quite
easily actually. I've included a sample code with some description:
(1) FacetSearchParams fsp = new FacetSearchParams();
(2) CountFacetRequest facetRequest = new CountFacetRequest(new
CategoryPath("monday"), 10);
(
20 matches
Mail list logo
