s. The term
frequency is then used for ranking purposes. At the moment I pick for
ranking the highest value from the freq vector which corresponds to the most
matching version.
Regards
Alex
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-uns
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Alex vB wrote:
>
> I am a little bit curious about the Lucene 3.0 performance results because
> the larger index seems to
> work faster?!? I already ran the test several times. Are my results
> realistic at all? I thought PForDelta/2 would outperform the standard i
.com/New-codecs-keep-Freq-skip-omit-Pos-tp2849776p284.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Wow cool ,
I will give that a try!
Thank you!!
Alex
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/New-codecs-keep-Freq-skip-omit-Pos-tp2849776p2852370.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Alex vB wrote:
> I also indexed one time with Lucene 3.0. Are those sizes really completely
> the same?
>
> Standard 4.0 W Freq W Pos 28.1 GB
> Standard 4.0 W/O Freq W/O Pos 6.2 GB
> Standard 3.0 W Freq W Pos 28.1 GB
> Standard 3.0 WO Freq WO Pos
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Alex vB wrote:
> During indexing I use StandardAnalyzer (StandardFilter, LowerCaseFilter,
> StopFilter).
> Can I get somewhere more information for Codec creation or is there just
> "grubbing" through the code?
try the following patch to switch PFOR1 and PFOR2 ov
://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/New-codecs-keep-Freq-skip-omit-Pos-tp2849776p2851898.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For
message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/New-codecs-keep-Freq-skip-omit-Pos-tp2849776p2851809.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-use
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Alex vB wrote:
>
> PforDelta W Freq W Pos 20.6 GB
> PforDelta W/O Freq W/O Pos 1.6 GB
> Standard 4.0 W Freq W Pos 28.1 GB
> Standard 4.0 W/O Freq W/O Pos 6.2 GB
> Pfor W Freq W Pos 22 GB
> Pfor W/O Freq
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Alex vB wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I am currently testing several new Lucene 4.0 codec implementations to
> compare with an own solution.
> The difference is that I am only indexing frequencies and not positions. I
> would like to have this for the other codecs.
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/New-codecs-keep-Freq-skip-omit-Pos-tp2849776p2849776.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
11 matches
Mail list logo