total time to
parse a query and run a search. I'll try and get around to posting the
code tonight.
- Mark
Jay Yu wrote:
Mark Miller wrote:
Good luck Jay. Keep in mind, pretty much all LuceneIndexAccessor does
is sync Readers with Writers and allow multiple threads to share the
same in
Mark,
Great effort getting the original lucene index accessor package in this
shape. I am sure this will benefit a lot of people using Lucene in a
multithread env.
I have a quick question to ask you:
Do you have to use the core Lucene 2.3-dev in order to use the accessor?
I will take a look a
reset
analyzer/Dir as in my own version.
Jay
Mark Miller wrote:
One final noteif you are using the IndexAccessor and you are only
accessing the index from one JVM, you can use the NoLockFactory and save
some sync cost there.
Jay Yu wrote:
Mark,
Great effort getting the original
code.
I will take your comments into account and update the code.
I have some other pieces to polish as well. Previously, I extended and
built upon the original code, but I can't give it away, so this is my
attempt at something lessor, but cleaner.
Jay Yu wrote:
Thanks for the tip.
One
y, it does work. I am also thinking about how to
handle the Analyzer, and I think the solution (the need to init some
indexaccessor params) might involve all these issues.
- Mark
Jay Yu wrote:
Mark,
Looking at your implementation of the DefaultIndexAccessor regarding
the writer, I think t
Hi All,
Does anyone know if the RangeFilter is a cached filter? I could not
tell from the api.
Thanks!
Jay
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks for clarifying this, Chris!
I agree with you that javadocs usual should doc all they do but often
times they skip few important things they do do.
Chris Hostetter wrote:
: Does anyone know if the RangeFilter is a cached filter? I could not
: tell from the api.
Generally speaking cla
If you want performance, a better way might be to assign some special
string/value (if it's easy to create) to the missing field of docs and
index the field without tokenizing it. Then you may search for that
special value to find the docs.
Jay
Les Fletcher wrote:
Does this particular range
d
can cheaply be stored, generated once and used often.
Dan
On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 13:57 -0700, Jay Yu wrote:
If you want performance, a better way might be to assign some special
string/value (if it's easy to create) to the missing field of docs and
index the field without tokenizing it. Then you
bits
final BitSet filterBitSet = queryFilter.bits(reader);
filterBitSet.flip(0,filterBitSet.size());
Now you have a filter that contains document matching the opposite of
that specified by the query, and can use in subsequent queries
Dan
On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 09:40 -0700, Jay Yu wrote:
daniel ro
In a multithread app like web app, a shared IndexSearcher could throw a
AlreadyClosedException when another thread is trying to update the
underlying IndexReader by closing the shared searcher after the index is
updated. Searching over the past discussions on this mailing list, I
found several
k its overlooked far too much.
- Mark
On 9/19/07, Jay Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In a multithread app like web app, a shared IndexSearcher could throw a
AlreadyClosedException when another thread is trying to update the
underlying IndexReader by closing the shared searcher after t
raight from the
originally submitted code.
4. I will look into getting together some code that I can share. The
multisearcher changes that are need are a couple of one liners really, so at
a minimum I will give you the changes needed.
- Mark
On 9/19/07, Jay Yu <[EMAIL PROTEC
from the
originally submitted code.
4. I will look into getting together some code that I can share. The
multisearcher changes that are need are a couple of one liners really, so at
a minimum I will give you the changes needed.
- Mark
On 9/19/07, Jay Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mark,
less your bulk loading). I've had such a system with 5+ million docs
on a standard machine and searches where still well below a second after
the first Searcher is cached (and even the first search is darn quick).
And that includes a lot of extra crap I am doing.
- Mark
Jay Yu wrote
will appreciate it!
Thanks for your help!
- Mark
Jay Yu wrote:
Mark,
Thanks for sharing your valuable exp. and thoughts.
Frankly our system already has most of the functionalities
LuceneIndexAcessor offers. The only thing I am looking for is to sync
the searchers' close. That's
16 matches
Mail list logo
