RE: Using the highlighter from the sandbox with a prefix query.

I am using query = searcher.rewrite( query ); and it is throwing java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException . Am I able to use the searcher rewrite method like this? Thanks, Michael -Original Message- From: Daniel Naber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005

Re: Using the highlighter from the sandbox with a prefix query.

On Feb 21, 2005, at 10:20 AM, Michael Celona wrote: I am using query = searcher.rewrite( query ); and it is throwing java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException . Am I able to use the searcher rewrite method like this? What's the full stack trace? Erik

Re: Using the highlighter from the sandbox with a prefix query.

On Feb 21, 2005, at 10:53 AM, Michael Celona wrote: That the only stack I get. One thing to mention that I am using a MultiSearcher to rewrite the queries. I tried... query = searcher_last.rewrite( query ); query = searcher_cur.rewrite( query ); using IndexSearcher and I don't get an error

RE: Using the highlighter from the sandbox with a prefix query.

One thing to mention that I am using a MultiSearcher to rewrite the queries. I tried... Ah. I remember this got a little ugly. The highlighter has a Junit test that demonstrates highlighting fuzzy queries when using a multisearcher. Take a look at that. I can't remember the ins and outs of the

RE: Using the highlighter from the sandbox with a prefix query.

Thank you this helped a lot... Michael Celona -Original Message- From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 11:55 AM To: Lucene Users List Subject: Re: Using the highlighter from the sandbox with a prefix query. On Feb 21, 2005, at 10:53 AM

Query Tuning

Hi All, How does Lucene handle multi term queries? Does it use short circuiting? So if a user entered: (a OR b) AND c But my program knew testing for c is cheaper than testing for (a OR b) and I rewrote the query as: c AND (a OR b) Would the query run faster? Sorry if this has already

Re: Query Tuning

On Monday 21 February 2005 19:59, Runde, Kevin wrote: Hi All, How does Lucene handle multi term queries? Does it use short circuiting? So if a user entered: (a OR b) AND c But my program knew testing for c is cheaper than testing for (a OR b) and I rewrote the query as: c AND (a OR b

Re: Query Tuning

Runde, Kevin wrote: Hi All, How does Lucene handle multi term queries? Does it use short circuiting? So if a user entered: (a OR b) AND c But my program knew testing for c is cheaper than testing for (a OR b) and I rewrote the query as: c AND (a OR b) Would the query run faster? Sorry if this has

Re: Query Tuning

the query as: c AND (a OR b) Would the query run faster? Sorry if this has already be answered, but for some reason the Archive search is not working for me today. Thanks, Kevin Not sure about what is in CVS, but look at BooleanQuery.scorer(). If all It's in svn nowadays

Optional Terms in a single query

Hi; I'm trying to create a query that look for a field containing type:181 and name doesn't contain tim, bill or harry. +(type: 181) +((-name: tim -name:bill -name:harry +oldfaith:stillHere)) +(type: 181) +((-name: tim OR bill OR harry +oldfaith:stillHere)) +(type: 181) +((-name:*(tim bill harry

Re: Optional Terms in a single query

On Monday 21 February 2005 23:23, Luke Shannon wrote: Hi; I'm trying to create a query that look for a field containing type:181 and name doesn't contain tim, bill or harry. type: 181 -(name: tim name:bill name:harry) +(type: 181) +((-name: tim -name:bill -name:harry +oldfaith:stillHere

Re: Optional Terms in a single query

, 2005 5:31 PM Subject: Re: Optional Terms in a single query On Monday 21 February 2005 23:23, Luke Shannon wrote: Hi; I'm trying to create a query that look for a field containing type:181 and name doesn't contain tim, bill or harry. type: 181 -(name: tim name:bill name:harry

Re: Optional Terms in a single query

The API I'm working with combines a series of queries into one larger one using a boolean query. Queries on the same field get OR's into one big query. All remaining queries are AND'd with this big one. Working with in this system I have: arg = (mario luigi bobby joe) //i do have control of how

Re: Optional Terms in a single query

Luke Shannon wrote: The API I'm working with combines a series of queries into one larger one using a boolean query. Queries on the same field get OR's into one big query. All remaining queries are AND'd with this big one. Working with in this system I have: arg = (mario luigi bobby joe) //i do

Re: Optional Terms in a single query

Hi Tod; Thanks for your help. I was able to do what you said but in a much uglier way using a Boolean Query and adding Wildcard Queries. The end result looks like this: The query: +(type:138) +((-name:*tim* -name:*bill* -name:*harry* +olfaithfull:stillhere)) But this one works as expected

Re: select where from query type in lucene

with that method? I don't think you can do it any simpler. Are you concerned about writing a string then having to use the query parser? You could also build it up manually: QueryParser parser = ... Query text = parser.parse(queryText); Query type = new BooleanQuery(); type.add(new TermQuery(new Term

Re: select where from query type in lucene

would have to be recreated whenever the index changes. The advantage is, that you save searching for the types for each query where the filter is reused while you can keep all documents within one index. Morus - To unsubscribe, e

Re: Query Question

Thanks Erik. Option 2 sounds like the path of least resistance. Luke - Original Message - From: Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lucene Users List lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 9:05 PM Subject: Re: Query Question On Feb 17, 2005, at 5:51 PM, Luke

Re: Using the highlighter from the sandbox with a prefix query.

try and use it with a prefix query (which is what you get having parsed a wild-card query), it doesn't return any highlighted sections. Has anyone else experienced this problem, or found a way around it? Thanks a lot for your suggestions

Re: Using the highlighter from the sandbox with a prefix query.

On Thursday 17 February 2005 08:37, lucuser4851 wrote:  We have been using the highlighter from the lucene sandbox, which works very nicely most of the time. However when we try and use it with a prefix query (which is what you get having parsed a wild-card query), it doesn't return any

Re: Query Question

Hello; My manager is now totally stuck about being able to query data with * in it. Here are two queries. TermQuery(new Term(type, 203)); WildcardQuery(new Term(name, *home\**)); They are joined in a boolean query. That query gives this result when you call the toString(): +(type:203) +(name

Re: Query Question

On Feb 17, 2005, at 5:51 PM, Luke Shannon wrote: My manager is now totally stuck about being able to query data with * in it. He's gonna have to wait a bit longer, you've got a slightly tricky situation on your hands WildcardQuery(new Term(name, *home\**)); The \* is the problem

select where from query type in lucene

Hi, i've problem with my my classes using lucene. my index looks like: type | content - document | x document | x view | x view | x dbentry| x dbentry| x my question now: how can i search for content where

What does [] do to a query and what's up with lucene.apache.org?

can't find any documentation that tells me what the brackets do to a query. I had a user that was used to another search engine that used [] to do proximity or near searches and tried it on this one. Actually I'd like to see the documentation for what the parser does. All that is mentioned

Re: What does [] do to a query and what's up with lucene.apache.org?

Hi, lucene.apache.org seems to work now. Here is the query syntax: http://lucene.apache.org/queryparsersyntax.html [] is used as [BEGIN-RANGE-STRING TO END-RANGE-STRING] Otis --- Jim Lynch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First I'm getting a The requested URL could not be retrieved

Re: What does [] do to a query and what's up with lucene.apache.org?

to parse the following string [this is a test]. I can't find any documentation that tells me what the brackets do to a query. I had a user that was used to another search engine that used [] to do proximity or near searches and tried it on this one. Actually I'd like to see the documentation

Re: What does [] do to a query and what's up with lucene.apache.org?

: Encountered is at line 1, column 15. Was expecting: ] ... when I tried to parse the following string [this is a test]. I can't find any documentation that tells me what the brackets do to a query. I had a user that was used to another search engine that used [] to do proximity or near

Query Analyzer

How do I set the analyzer when I build the query in my code instead of using a query parser ? Thanks in advance Ravi. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Query Analyzer

On Feb 7, 2005, at 11:29 AM, Ravi wrote: How do I set the analyzer when I build the query in my code instead of using a query parser ? You don't. All terms you use for any Query subclasses you instantiate must match exactly the terms in the index. If you need an analyzer to do this then you're

RE: Query Analyzer

That worked. Thanks a lot. -Original Message- From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 11:39 AM To: Lucene Users List Subject: Re: Query Analyzer On Feb 7, 2005, at 11:29 AM, Ravi wrote: How do I set the analyzer when I build the query in my code

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

Very Nice. Thanks! Luke - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lucene Users List lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 2:12 AM Subject: Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x I think you may can use a filter

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

Another approach... You can make a Filter that is the inverse of the output from another filter, which means you can make a QueryFilter on the search, then wrap it in your inverse Filter. you can't execute a query on a filter without having a Query object, but you can just apply the Filter

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

is this line: Query query2 = QueryParser.parse(*, kcfileupload, new StandardAnalyzer()); Results in the following error: org.apache.lucene.queryParser.ParseException: Lexical error at line 1, column 2. Encountered: EOF after : I was hoping it would create a wild card search on kcfileupload. I feel

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x (but still has the field)

, and I hope to replace it soon. If anyone has ideas please let me know. Luke - Original Message - From: Chris Hostetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lucene Users List lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 3:03 PM Subject: Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't

Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

Hello; I have a query that finds document that contain fields with a specific value. query1 = QueryParser.parse(jpg, kcfileupload, new StandardAnalyzer()); This works well. I would like a query that find documents containing all kcfileupload fields that don't contain jpg. The example I found

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

documents; in other words, it isn't possible to  use a query like NOT term to find all documents that don't  contain a term.  So does that mean the above example wouldn't work?  Exactly. You cannot search for -kcfileupload:jpg, you need at  least one clause that actually _includes_ documents.  Do you

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

Ok. I have added the following to every document: doc.add(Field.UnIndexed(olFaithfull, stillHere)); The plan is a query that says: olFaithull = stillHere and kcfileupload!=jpg. I have been experimenting with the MultiFieldQueryParser, this is not working out for me. From a syntax how

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

Hello, Still working on the same query, here is the code I am currently working with. I am thinking this should bring up all the documents that have olFaithFull=stillHere and kcfileupload!=jpg (so anything else) query1 = QueryParser.parse(jpg, kcfileupload, new StandardAnalyzer()); query2

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

-kcfileupload:jpg +olFaithFull:stillhere This looks right to me. Why the 0 results? Looks good to me, too. You sure all your documents have olFaithFull:stillhere and there is at least a document with kcfileupload not being jpg? -- Maik Schreiber * http://www.blizzy.de -- Get GMail invites

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

Yes. There should be 119 with stillHere, and if I run a query in Luke on kcfileupload = ppt, it returns one result. I am thinking I should at least get this result back with: -kcfileupload:jpg +olFaithFull:stillhere? Luke - Original Message - From: Maik Schreiber [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

Yes. There should be 119 with stillHere, You have double-checked that, haven't you? :) and if I run a query in Luke on kcfileupload = ppt, it returns one result. I am thinking I should at least get this result back with: -kcfileupload:jpg +olFaithFull:stillhere? You really should. -- Maik

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x Yes. There should be 119 with stillHere, You have double-checked that, haven't you? :) and if I run a query in Luke on kcfileupload = ppt, it returns one result. I am thinking I should at least get this result back

Numbers in the Query String

Hello, How can one search for a document based on the query which has numbers in the query srting. e.g. query = Java 2 Platform J2EE What do I need to do so that the numbers do not get neglected. I am using StandardAnalyzer to index the pages and using StopAnalyzer to search the documents

Re: Numbers in the Query String

Hetan Shah wrote: Hello, How can one search for a document based on the query which has numbers in the query srting. e.g. query = Java 2 Platform J2EE What do I need to do so that the numbers do not get neglected. I am using StandardAnalyzer to index the pages and using StopAnalyzer to search

Re: Numbers in the Query String

Using different analyzers for indexing and searching is not recommended. Your numbers are not even in the index because you are using StandardAnalyzer. Use Luke to look at your index. Otis --- Hetan Shah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, How can one search for a document based on the query

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

typeNegativeSearch = new BooleanQuery(); typeNegativeSearch.add(query1, true, false); typeNegativeSearch.add(query2, true, false); Reutrns 0 results and is in string form : +kcfileupload:jpg +olFaithFull:stillhere If I do the query kcfileupload:jpg in Luke I get 9 docs, each doc

RE: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

, false); typeNegativeSearch.add(query2, true, false); Reutrns 0 results and is in string form : +kcfileupload:jpg +olFaithFull:stillhere If I do the query kcfileupload:jpg in Luke I get 9 docs, each doc containing a olFaithFull:stillHere. Why would +kcfileupload:jpg

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

stillHere Capital H. - Original Message - From: Kauler, Leto S [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lucene Users List lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 6:40 PM Subject: RE: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x First thing that jumps

RE: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

Because you are build from QueryParser rather than a TermQuery, all search terms in the query are being lowercased by StandardAnalyzer. So your query of olFaithFull:stillhere requires that there is an exact index term of stillhere in that field. It depends on how you built the index (index

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x Because you are build from QueryParser rather than a TermQuery, all search terms in the query are being lowercased by StandardAnalyzer. So your query of olFaithFull:stillhere requires that there is an exact index term of stillhere

Re: Parsing The Query: Every document that doesn't have a field containing x

)); writer.addDocument(document); writer.close(); } public void testSecurityFilter() throws Exception { TermQuery query = new TermQuery(new Term(keywords, info)); IndexSearcher searcher = new IndexSearcher(directory); Hits hits = searcher.search(query); assertEquals(Both documents

Re: Numbers in the Query String

. Otis --- Hetan Shah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, How can one search for a document based on the query which has numbers in the query srting. e.g. query = Java 2 Platform J2EE What do I need to do so that the numbers do not get neglected. I am using

Query Format

Hello All, What should my query look like if I want to search all or any of the following key words. Sun Linux Red Hat Advance Server replies are much appreciated. -H - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional

Re: Query Format

How are you indexing your document? If you're using QueryParser with the default operator set to OR (which is the default), then you've already provided the expression you need :) Erik On Feb 1, 2005, at 6:29 PM, Hetan Shah wrote: Hello All, What should my query look like if I want

lucene query (sql kind)

Hello all, I want to run dynamic queries against the lucene index. Is there any native syntax available for Lucene so that I can query, by first generating the query in say an XML or SQL like format (cache this query) and then use this query over lucene index. e.g. So a lucene query syntax

Re: lucene query (sql kind)

On Jan 28, 2005, at 12:40, sunil goyal wrote: I want to run dynamic queries against the lucene index. Is there any native syntax available for Lucene so that I can query, by first generating the query in say an XML or SQL like format (cache this query) and then use this query over lucene index

Re: lucene query (sql kind)

Hello, To build queries, you can generate a query like (text:house OR text:car) AND (keywords:building), and then parse it with the QueryParser.parse method to get the Lucene query. Is not 100% sql-like syntax, but it's more clear than the lucene syntax. Hope it helps David sunil

Re: lucene query (sql kind)

I've merged some different fields in one query, with the name of one of these fields as the second parameter in the static method, and it worked fine. Also, you can do a little query parser, and build the queries with BooleanQuery. David sunil goyal wrote: Hello, I was just trying

Re: lucene query (sql kind)

choose that. I just thought that Query Parser needs to be specifies what it should expect before hand. So did field AND field. But I was wrong. Further name:\john\ and name:john should be the same. Just in case it's not john but hello john or some phrase. Regards Sunil On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 13

Re: lucene query (sql kind)

(Cloudscape). This approach has some appeal and I've been able to use the same class as a UDF in both databases but it does have issues: it looks like this UDF based integration won't scale. The above query took 80 milliseconds using 10,000 records. Another index/database with 50,000 records

Re: lucene query (sql kind)

. For example, sorting on the date field, and any other range query. I think the better way is to look at ways to integrate lucene tightly into a java relational database, such as HSQL, McKoi or Derby. In particular, that integration would make it possible for queries like contains(...), which

RE: lucene query (sql kind)

Lucene a query result (i.e. a list of rows) and then have Lucene send me back say the primary key of the rows that match and the other Lucene goodness: ranking, number of hits, etc. Could be pretty powerful and simplify the deployment for database driven applications. [Note: this opinion

Re: lucene query (sql kind)

, then translate the Lucene results into meaningful links. It actually works better than it sounds, however it could be easier. If I could just give Lucene a query result (i.e. a list of rows) and then have Lucene send me back say the primary key of the rows that match and the other Lucene goodness

Re: query term frequency

I implemented a Query version of the TermVector org.apache.lucene.search.QueryTermVector Works off of an array of Strings or a String and an Analyzer. Is this what you are looking for? [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1/28/2005 6:33:18 AM On Jan 27, 2005, at 10:24 PM, Jonathan Lasko wrote: No, the number

Re: query term frequency

This from the highlighter package will give you the IDF : WeightedTerm[] QueryTermExtractor.getIdfWeightedTerms(Query query, IndexReader reader, String fieldName) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional

query term frequency

What do I call to get the term frequencies for terms in the Query? I can't seem to find it in the Javadoc... Thanks. Jonathan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: query term frequency

Jonathan Lasko wrote: What do I call to get the term frequencies for terms in the Query? I can't seem to find it in the Javadoc... Do you mean the # of docs that have a term? http://jakarta.apache.org/lucene/docs/api/org/apache/lucene/index/IndexReader.html#docFreq(org.apache.lucene.index.Term

Re: WordNet code updated, now with query expansion -- Re: SYNONYM + GOOGLE

easier to use) or make it separate (too academic?) Well... the ideal case would be (easy) customization :-), form an external text (XML ?) file. Depending of the kind of relationship, the boost factor could be adjusted when the query is expanded. The same on relationships' depths. For example

Re: WordNet code updated, now with query expansion -- Re: SYNONYM + GOOGLE

Pierrick Brihaye wrote: Hi, David Spencer a écrit : One example of expansion with the synonym boost set to 0.9 is the query big dog expands to: Interesting. Do you plan to add expansion on other Wordnet relationships ? Hypernyms and hyponyms would be a good start point for thesaurus-like search

MoreLikeThis and other similarity query generators checked in + online demo

Based on mail from Doug I wrote a more like this query generator, named, well, MoreLikeThis. Bruce Ritchie and Mark Harwood made changes to it (esp term vector support) and bug fixes. Thanks to everyone. I've checked in the code to the sandbox under contributions/similarity. The package it ends

Re: WordNet code updated, now with query expansion -- Re: SYNONYM + GOOGLE

. If you just go search CiteSeer for WordNet, you will find the output of every failed MS thesis experiment to improve retrieval performance by naive application of WordNet synsets. But I like the query expansion code. Ian

Re: WordNet code updated, now with query expansion -- Re: SYNONYM + GOOGLE

On Wednesday 12 January 2005 01:47, David Spencer wrote: Amusingly then, documents with the terms liberal wienerwurst match big dog! :) There's something like frequency information in WordNet, it could probably be used to ignore the uncommon meanings. Regards Daniel --

Query based stemming

Hi, I'm new to Lucene, so I apologize if this issue has been discussed before (I'm sure it has), but I had a hard time finding an answer using google. (Maybe this would be a good candidate for the FAQ!) :) Is it possible to enable stem queries on a per-query basis? It doesn't seem to be possible

Re: Query based stemming

From what I've read, if you want to have a choice, the easiest way is to index the documents twice. Once with stemming on and once with it off placing the results in two different indexes. Then at query time, select which index you want to use based on whether you want stemming on or off

Re: Query based stemming

: Is it possible to enable stem queries on a per-query basis? It doesn't : seem to be possible since the stem tokenizing is done during the : indexing process. Are people basically stuck with having all their : queries stemmed or none at all? : From what I've read, if you want to have a choice

Re: Span Query Performance

On Thursday 06 January 2005 02:17, Andrew Cunningham wrote: Hi all, I'm currently doing a query similar to the following: for w in wordset: query = w near (word1 V word2 V word3 ... V word1422); perform query and I am doing this through SpanQuery.getSpans(), iterating through

Re: Span Query Performance

Sorry for the duplicate on lucene-dev, it should have gone to lucene-user directly: A bit more: On Thursday 06 January 2005 10:22, Paul Elschot wrote: On Thursday 06 January 2005 02:17, Andrew Cunningham wrote: Hi all, I'm currently doing a query similar to the following: for w

Span Query Performance

Hi all, I'm currently doing a query similar to the following: for w in wordset: query = w near (word1 V word2 V word3 ... V word1422); perform query and I am doing this through SpanQuery.getSpans(), iterating through the spans and counting the matches, which can result in 4782282 matches

Correct query

Hello, I indexed some document that included a word RPG/4. So, when I made a search - I builded a query Text:RPG but it didn't find a thing only Text:RPG/4 gave me the correct result. Tell me please what have I do to build a a dynamic (not hardcoded like in this example )query to get right

Re: Correct query

On Dec 27, 2004, at 3:21 AM, Alex Kiselevski wrote: Hello, I indexed some document that included a word RPG/4. So, when I made a search - I builded a query Text:RPG but it didn't find a thing only Text:RPG/4 gave me the correct result. Tell me please what have I do to build a a dynamic

RE: Correct query

Thanks Erik, I use StandardAnalyze to index RPG/4. I use StandardAnalyzer and IndexSearcher with TermQuery without QueryParser. So, I thought that as a result of query Text:RPG I still have to get some hit, but it didn't happen. -Original Message- From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL

Re: Correct query

On Dec 27, 2004, at 6:28 AM, Alex Kiselevski wrote: Thanks Erik, I use StandardAnalyze to index RPG/4. I use StandardAnalyzer and IndexSearcher with TermQuery without QueryParser. So, I thought that as a result of query Text:RPG I still have to get some hit, but it didn't happen

A simple Query Language

Hi, I am going to implement a search service and plan to use Lucene. Is there any simple query language that is independent of any particular search engine out there? Thanks Dongling If you have received

RE: A simple Query Language

support. After that, I think you're getting pretty specific. Lucene supports all of these and many more. Chuck -Original Message- From: Dongling Ding [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 5:08 PM To: Lucene Users List Subject: A simple Query Language

reoot site query results

for determining root websites and applying a huge boost to them in one fashion or another? mainly so it appears before any sub pages? (assuming the query is in reference to that site) ... -- ___ Chris Fraschetti e [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: reoot site query results

there in the search engine world have a good schema for determining root websites and applying a huge boost to them in one fashion or another? mainly so it appears before any sub pages? (assuming the query is in reference to that site) ... Consider applying the boost to the Document, rather than the field

Re: reoot site query results

not a proper solution. Does anyone out there in the search engine world have a good schema for determining root websites and applying a huge boost to them in one fashion or another? mainly so it appears before any sub pages? (assuming the query is in reference to that site) ... Consider

Help on Phrase Prefix query

Hi, Presently i am working on a requirement in my application, to do the search using lucene as follows, Users enters phrase prefix query text. The query should be constructed as follows, - a PhrasePrefixQuery based on the user entered text, for eg FieldA - a termquery based on another field

Re: Help on Phrase Prefix query

Mahendra, Could you provide a concrete, and simple, example of what you're trying to achieve? It would help me understand what you're after. Any Query implementation works fine as a clause within a BooleanQuery, there is nothing special to do for a PhrasePrefixQuery in this regard

Re: reoot site query results

for determining root websites and applying a huge boost to them in one fashion or another? mainly so it appears before any sub pages? (assuming the query is in reference to that site) ... - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Help on Phrase Prefix query

? It would help me understand what you're after. Any Query implementation works fine as a clause within a BooleanQuery, there is nothing special to do for a PhrasePrefixQuery in this regard. Erik On Dec 6, 2004, at 6:34 AM, Mahendra wrote: Hi, Presently i am working

Re: Help on Phrase Prefix query

help me understand what you're after. Any Query implementation works fine as a clause within a BooleanQuery, there is nothing special to do for a PhrasePrefixQuery in this regard. Erik On Dec 6, 2004, at 6:34 AM, Mahendra wrote: Hi, Presently i am working on a requirement in my application

structuring a multifield query

Hey there folks.. I'm having a bit of trouble figuring out how to use and AND term among all terms, but spread throughout the fields. I currently use the static MultiFieldQueryParser method to parse my query.. basically I have several fields.. title, contents, and a few others... and I would

Re: Help on the Query Parser

On Wednesday 24 November 2004 08:16, Morus Walter wrote: Lucene itself doesn't handle wildcards within phrases. This can be added using PhrasePrefixQuery (which is slightly misnamed): http://jakarta.apache.org/lucene/docs/api/org/apache/lucene/search/PhrasePrefixQuery.html Regards Daniel

RE: Re: Help on the Query Parser

Hi Daniel, I couldn't figure out how to use the PharsePrefixQuery with a phase like java* developer. It only provides method to add terms. Can a term contain wildcard character in lucene? Thanks, Terence On Wednesday 24 November 2004 08:16, Morus Walter wrote: Lucene itself doesn't

RE: Re: Help on the Query Parser

Hi Morus, I want to search for the string like below: - java developer - javascript developer By searching java*, it will return more than I want. That's why I am thinking java* developer. Terence Terence Lai writes: Look likes that the wildcard query disappeared. In fact, I am

RE: Using multiple analysers within a query

array, and then overrode getFieldQuery to check the queryText for a start char (= for example) and if found remove it and switch to a non-tokenising analyser. Then I found that because that analyser always returns a single token (TermQuery) it would send through spaces into the final query string

RE: Using multiple analysers within a query

Actually, just realised a PhraseQuery is incorrect... I only want a single TermQuery but it just needs to be quoted, d'oh. -Original Message- Then I found that because that analyser always returns a single token (TermQuery) it would send through spaces into the final query string

Help on the Query Parser

Hi all, I am trying to use the QueryParser.parse() to parse a query string like java* developer. Note that I want the wildcard string, java*, followed by the word developer. The following is the code. - String qryStr = \java* developer\; String fieldname = text; StandardAnalyzer

Re: Help on the Query Parser

Terence Lai writes: Look likes that the wildcard query disappeared. In fact, I am expecting text:java* developer to be returned. It seems to me that the QueryParser cannot handle the wildcard within a quoted String. That's not just QueryParser. Lucene itself doesn't handle wildcards

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >