Terry,
With regular queries (non-Span-queries) you cannot request that results of
OR / AND / NOT operations are near to one another (i.e. (A or B) near (C or
D)). The span queries solve that problem by allowing any span query to be
used in a SpanNearQuery (and vice versa). There are other
Hi Everyone.
I am trying to figure out how create a query that matches
A ? B
Where ? is exactly one token. Can anyone tell me how to do that?
Obviously it's easy to match 'A * B' where '*' is 0 or 1 tokens (just use a
PhraseQuery and set slop to 1). However, if I require exactly one
Term(field,six hundred * five));
Thanks!
Jochen
-Original Message-
From: Otis Gospodnetic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 12:00 PM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Query: A ? B
Use WildcardQuery: A?B
Otis
--- Jochen Frey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Everyone
, at 4:29 PM, Jochen Frey wrote:
Otis:
Maybe I don't understand this right, but I *think* I am looking for
something different:
I am trying to write a query like this: my * house which should
match my
own house, my red house, my small house, but should not match my
house ... you get
Anson,
One way of doing it is having subsets of your indexes / data on
different machines. Each machine indexes its own data. You implement a
system that distributes queries to the various machines and merges the
results back.
The working well completely depends on your
Hello,
Here's is a benchmark. I am not sure if that is proper etiquette,
but I will just paste it into this mail and hope that it gets funneled into
the right channels.
Cheers!
Jochen
benchmark
ul
p
bHardware Environment/bbr/
liiDedicated machine for
dataset greater than a few M
docs to experiment with.
cheers,
sv
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Jochen Frey wrote:
Hi,
Yes, this is correct, I am dealing with a few 100GB (close to 1TB).
I am, however, distributing the data across several machines and then
merge
the results from all
Hi!
I hope this is the right forum for this post.
I was wondering if other people would consider this a bug (it might be a
feature and I am missing the point of it):
.The default IndexWriter.maxFieldLength is 10,000.
.The point of maxFieldLength is to limit memory usage.
.The current position
Hi,
Yes, this is correct, I am dealing with a few 100GB (close to 1TB).
I am, however, distributing the data across several machines and then merge
the results from all the machines together (until I find a better faster
solution).
Cheers!
-Original Message-
From:
Hi,
I am using Lucene to index a large number of web pages (a few 100GB) and the
indexing speed is great.
Lately I have been trying to index on a sentence level, not the document
level. My problem is that the indexing speed has gone down dramatically and
I am wondering if there is any way for me
?
-Original Message-
From: Jochen Frey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 4:17 PM
To: 'Lucene Users List'
Subject: Indexing Speed: Documents vs. Sentences
Hi,
I am using Lucene to index a large number of web pages (a few 100GB) and
the
indexing speed is great
, December 17, 2003 1:36 PM
To: 'Lucene Users List'
Subject: RE: Indexing Speed: Documents vs. Sentences
When you parse the page you can prevent sentence-boundry hits from
matching
your criteria
-Original Message-
From: Jochen Frey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December
12 matches
Mail list logo
