e In Action* to
learn more about how to use Lucene in detail.
Kind regards
Heikki Doeleman
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:03 PM, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a requirement to perform a full-text search in a new application
> and I came across Lucene and I want to check if it helps our cause.
&g
are ranked lower. But
without losing the usual relevance ranking score--just influence it a bit.
I suppose I could make a CustomScoreQuery that calculates something based on
frequency of titles, but I don't see how that than might be combined with
the default ranking score.
Does anyone have
OK, it's not the idea that the nested NOT query has got anything to do with
booleanField_1, so I'll try to phrase very clearly what I want :
the query should return docs where
( someField_1 = 0 OR someField_2 = 0) AND
( booleanField_1 = false ) AND
( NOT ( ( someField_1 = 0 OR someField_2 = 0 )
t have shown up in all ways of
viewing this list).
I don't think there is a mis-matched bracket at the end (there was in my
textual description of this though), and I also don't see how this can be
more fully bracketed.
Kind regards
Heikki Doeleman
--
View this message in context:
T (
someField_1 = 0 OR someField_2 = 0) AND booleanField_2 = true )
The problem seems to be with the BUT NOT part of the query. I get no
results, even though I would have expected so (and I've checked the index
contents with Luke).
Any ideas most welcome ..
Kind regards
Heikki Doeleman
--
iorixxx: that works ! Thank you so much.
Ian: don't know why, but my original query returned no results, and
iorixxx's suggestion works as expected. I'm using Lucene 3.5.
thank you very much,
kind regards
Heikki Doeleman
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3
.
I tried this:
-FIELD:prefix +(FIELD:prefix*)
but it doesn't work.
Any help greatly appreciated,
kind regards,
Heikki Doeleman
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/How-to-construct-this-query-tp3806767p3806767.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing
other
documents that are in the same index. This is why it seems logical to me
that if different domains use separate indexes, the relevance scoring is
more accurate.
Kind regards,
Heikki Doeleman
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
> Heikki,
>
> it does solve your m
s
seems logical.
I just don't know how much impact it really has, and whether it is worth to
deal with it by presenting separate result sets from separate index
searches ..
thanks for your reply !
Heikki Doeleman
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
>
> Le 3 janv
appropriate stopwords/differnt analyzers when indexing and searching a
particular language, but that's a different issue obviously.
thanks in advance,
Heikki Doeleman
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Designing-a-multiling
oops my previous message was not intended to be sent to this list. Please
ignore it. Is there a moderator who might please at least prevent it from
ending up in the archives ?
regards
Heikki Doeleman
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Paul Girard wrote:
> Dear Lucene users community,
>
dear Paul,
my name is Heikki Doeleman and I'm very interested by your mail.
I am a freelance Java/J2EE developer with over 10 years experience, and 6
years experience using Lucene in various projects. Since 2007 I am involved
as one of the core developers of the Open Source geospatial ca
[] I/we build them from source via an SVN/Git checkout.
>
> >
> [] Other (someone in your company mirrors them internally or via a
> downstream project)
Heikki Doeleman
thanks !
With your fast response we've been able to get it to work.
Kind regards
Heikki Doeleman
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Uwe Schindler wrote:
> The problem with your implementatio n of reuseableTokenStream is that it
> does not set a new reader when it reuses. Reset() i
actually fulfills our
goals (seeing the different test results we got).
So I'd very much appreciate it if someone could help us understand this, and
tell us if we're taking the right approach here to achieve this seemingly
simple goal.
Kind regards
Heikki Doeleman
repository, in one go ? I did it now by right-clicking links to files
and doing save-as, for each file.. this was maybe OK for the highlighter,
but what if you want an entire big project ?
thanks again
heikki doeleman
On 1/13/07, Mark Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Which version are you us
creating a PhraseQuery, and I tried the QueryParser.parse() using
the same analyzer used for indexing and searching. Nothing helps !! Also
tried escaping the brackets, to no avail.
Any help would be very much appreciated !
thank you
Heikki Doeleman
uperior in speed,
memory usage, and ease of programming model.
Heikki Doeleman
spinergywmy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To
java-user@lucene.apache.org
cc
bcc
Subject
Index XML file
spinergywmy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Please respond to java-user@lucene.apache.org
14/12/2006 11:54
of. To
me this seems like a mix-up of different functionalities; I would expect a
highlighter to do just the highlighting, and nothing else (not that this
has anything to do with my phrase highlighting problem -- just wondering).
Heikki DOELEMAN
mark harwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
yzer.
Does anyone have a good example about how to implement a highlighting
function that works well with phrase queries, too ?
thank you very much.
Heikki DOELEMAN
20 matches
Mail list logo