You still have a disk seek per doc if the index can't fit in memory
(usually more costly than reading the fields) .
Why not use FieldCache?
-Mike
On 2-Aug-07, at 5:41 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
If you are just retrieving your custom id and you have more stored
fields (and they are not tiny) yo
If you are just retrieving your custom id and you have more stored
fields (and they are not tiny) you certainly do want to use a field
selector. I would suggest SetBasedFieldSelector.
- Mark
testn wrote:
Hi,
Why don't you consider to use FieldSelector? LoadFirstFieldSelector has an
ability t
On Thursday 02 August 2007 19:28:48 Mohammad Norouzi wrote:
> you should not store them in an Array structure since they will take up the
> memory.
> the BitSet is the best structure to store them
You can't store strings in a BitSet.
What I would do is return a List but make a custom subclass of
Hi,
Why don't you consider to use FieldSelector? LoadFirstFieldSelector has an
ability to help you load only the first field in the document without
loading all the fields. After that, you can keep the whole document if you
like. It should help improve performance better.
is_maximum wrote:
>
you should not store them in an Array structure since they will take up the
memory.
the BitSet is the best structure to store them
On 8/2/07, makkhar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Heres my index structure :
>
> Document -> contract ID -id (index AND store)
> -> paramName
yes it decrease the performance but the only solution.
I've spent many weeks to find best way to retrive my own IDs but find this
way as last one
now I am storing the ids in a BitSet structure and it's fast enough
public void collect(...){
idBitSet.set(Integer.valueOf(searcher.doc(id).get("MyOwnI
Heres my index structure :
Document -> contract ID -id (index AND store)
-> paramName -name (index AND store)
-> paramValue -value (index BUT NOT store)
When I get back 2 hits, each document contains ID and paramName, I have
no interest in paramN
Hi,
The solution you suggested will definitely work but will definitely slow
down my search by an order of magnitude. The problem I am trying to solve is
performance, thats why I need the collection of IDs and not the whole
documents.
- thanks for the prompt reply.
is_maximum wrote:
>
> y
What is the structure of your index?
If you havnt already, then add a new field to your index that stores the
contractId. For all other fields, set the "store" flag to false while
indexing.
You can now safely retrieve the value of this contractId field based on
your search results.
Regards,
kapil
yes if you extend your class from HitCollector and override the collect()
mthod with following signature you can get IDs
public void collect(int id, float score)
On 8/2/07, makkhar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>Can I get just a list of document Ids given a search criteria ? To
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
