Wouldn't boosting the term AUTHOR:Manning with a boost factor of 0 do the
trick ?
Naama
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Philippe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to rank my results only on parts of my query. E.g my query is
> "TITLE:Lucene AND AUTHOR:Manning". After this query standard lucene ranking
are
> more near the core of Lucene.
> Hope this makes sense,
> Yuval
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Naama Kraus [mailto:naamakr...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:19 AM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Overriding Lucene&#x
/
> I hope it helps you too
>
> Dionisis
>
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Naama Kraus wrote:
>
> > ok, thanks Yuval. I'll take a look.
> > Could you (or anyone) please elaborate why payloads "seem like a worse
> fit"
> > ?
> >
> > TX, Naam
his lecture:
>
> http://lucene-eurocon.org/slides/Lucene-Forecast-Version-Unicode-Flex-and-Mod_Willnauer&Schindler.pdf
> Alternatively, you may use payloads, but they seem like a worse fit.
> Good Luck,
> Yuval
>
> ________
> From: Naama Kra
Hi,
Is there a way for an application to index a document along with its "term
weighted vector" (Lucene's TermFreqVector). I.e., override the term
frequencies computed by Lucene, with an application's computed term weights
(non frequency based) ?
I don't think I want to use Scorer#score() for appl
HTH
> Erick
>
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Naama Kraus wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I wanted to ask regarding search results scores equality:
> > In case two documents get an equal score - how does Lucene "break"
> equality
> > ?
>
Hi All,
I have several questions with regard to long queries evaluation. I'd
appreciate your input.
In case this issue is documented somewhere, I'd be glad for any pointers.
How does long queries effect search performance ? E.g. a search query
composed of few tens of term ? Few hundreds of terms
Hi All,
I wanted to ask regarding search results scores equality:
In case two documents get an equal score - how does Lucene "break" equality
?
I.e. by which criteria one document would be ranked before another ? Random
? Indexing time ? Anything else ?
Can I control this one somehow ?
(I am using
> > mount option for ext3 does so on Linux).
> >
> > Can you check the mount options on your RAID filesystem?
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Naama Kraus
> wrote:
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> I am back to this one afte
RAID should be perfectly fine for Lucene, in general, unless
> the mount is configured to ignore fsync (I think the "data=writeback"
> mount option for ext3 does so on Linux).
>
> Can you check the mount options on your RAID filesystem?
>
> Mike
>
> On Mon, Feb 8
en on power loss it may still lose data. Lucene
cannot guarantee consistency on such devices."
Well, for me, running on the SCSI disks is just fine, I wanted to anyway
share my experience.
Naama
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 12:09 AM, Naama Kraus wrote:
> Thanks all for the hints, I'll
> in the document count and the max doc ID should
> > tell you something...
> >
> > Is it possible that you are updating existing docs
> > rather than adding new ones?
> >
> > Best
> > Erick
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Naama Kra
your indexer, when you
> add documents, is pointing at the same directory your
> search is pointing to?
> 3> Have you gotten a copy of Luke and examined your index
> to see if, perhaps, your documents aren't being added the
> way you think they are?
>
Hi,
I am using IndexWriter#commit() methods in my program to commit document
additions to the index. I do that once in a while, after a bunch of
documents were added. Since my indexing process is long, I want to make sure
I don't loose too many additions in case of a crash.
When running on Windows
14 matches
Mail list logo
