// The test source code (second attempt).
// Just in case the .txt attachment does not pass through
// I am pasting the code here:
package index_test;
import org.apache.lucene.search.*;
import org.apache.lucene.store.FSDirectory;
import org.apache.lucene.store.Directory;
import org.apache.lucene.
> What did you do in your private
investigation?1. empirical tests with an index of
nearly 75,000 docs (I am attaching the test source)
2. reviewing and tracing the source code of
Lucene
(I do not claim I have gained a deep understanding
of it ;-)
> Sorted by descending relevance (the defa
Guys,
my private investigation already left me sceptic about the outcome of this
issue,
but I've decided to post it as a final resort.
Perhaps the gurus know the right answer :-)
Suppose I have an index of about 5,000,000 docs
and I am running a single term queries against it, including queries wh
alculate any data that
> relies on the Lucene document numbers.
>
> Regards, Luc.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Stanislav Jordanov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: donderdag 24 februari 2005 14:18
> To: Lucene Users List
> Subject: Custom filters & document numbers
>
Given an IndexReader a custom filter is supposed to create a bit set, that
maps each document numbers to {'visible', 'invisible'}
On the other hand, it is stated that Lucene is allowed to change document
numbers.
Is it guaranteed that this BitSet's view of document numbers won't change
while the Bi
In order to sort by specific field
that field must be (aka Keyword)
Perhaps your field is tokenized?
- Original Message -
From: "Sanyi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 2:24 PM
Subject: there are more terms than documents in field ...
> Hi!
>
> I'm indexing
