solr does not support scheduling internally. Typically this is done
with an external program like:
http://www.quartz-scheduler.org/
I *think* the lucid search thingy has built in scheduling...
http://www.lucidimagination.com/products/lucidworks-search-platform
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 9:07 AM,
have you tried anything yet? solr? lucene?
with an OR query (the default) and standard analysis, it should just work
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Dave Jones dh...@comcast.net wrote:
Dear Lucene Wizards,
I am trying to do the following:
Given: all items are book titles
...
Little
As it stands now, we have the following concrete suggestions:
1. Log IRC -- from the looks of #lucene-dev, it appears that people have not
migrated to the new logged version. To me, we really should just hook up the
logger to #lucene and forget #lucene-dev ever existed. We should also put
-1
for most of the same reasons everyone else is saying...
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Yonik Seeley yo...@apache.org wrote:
A single merged project works only when people are relatively on the same
page,
and when people feel it's mutually beneficial. Recent events make it
clear that
+1
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.org wrote:
Background: Please see the December Lucene Board report, amongst others, for
description and multiple mailing list threads (both here and on Lucene.NET)
on the background of this vote. This move has been a
I think this sounds reasonable. Though I feel like you already sent
out the same notice before.
+1
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.org wrote:
The failure of any of the Lucene.NET committers to respond to status request
for the Board Report this month doesn't
+1
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Grant Ingersoll gsing...@apache.org wrote:
Per the discuss thread and the fact that Java is TM Oracle, I would like us
to change Lucene Java to now be referred to as Lucene Core. The primary
change is on the website where the Java tab will now be the Core
http://people.apache.org/~hossman/#threadhijack
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 12:22 PM, marcus clemens
marcusclem...@hotmail.com wrote:
hi
i am looking for a java lucene solr contrator to work in west sussex . the
contract will last a year and its paying around £ 400 a day
is this of interest
+1
dropped into my app, everything works and my tests pass...
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Andi Vajda va...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Uwe Schindler wrote:
I have posted a release candidate for both Lucene Java 2.9.3 and 3.0.2
(which both have the same bug fix level,
I'm confused... what is the need for a new name? The only place where
there is a conflict is in the top level svn tree...
What about something general like:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/dev
or
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/project
ryan
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:02 PM,
+1
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Yonik Seeley ysee...@gmail.com wrote:
Apoligies in advance for calling yet another vote, but I just wanted
to make sure this was official.
Mike's second VOTE thread could probably technically stand on it's own
(since it included PMC votes), but given that I
Wow... i've been offline for a while (new baby, yy!) and am now
skimming through the various lists...
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Michael McCandless
luc...@mikemccandless.com wrote:
A new vote, that slightly changes proposal from last vote (adding only
that Lucene can cut a release
I'm still trying to grok the different points of view and apparent
(mis?) perceptions on what everyone is saying.
Going back to the beginning, the basic problem is that code is
duplicated between solr and lucene and fixing that is difficult with
the current structure.
There is no intention merge
But is that really worth breaking all the existing references to
this? What
value is that for the users?
Just to clarify... your concern is two fold:
1. No term is perfect, Cartesian Tier is as good as any, lets stick
with it.
2. There are already references to cartesian tiers (like this
14 matches
Mail list logo
