Yes the default behavior (sort on relevance) is a form of sort. But that sort don't need to access the field values which makes it alot faster. Sorting on fields works good up to index sizes of a couple of gigabytes ( on a test machine dual opteron 2 GB ram) / Marcus
________________________________ Från: Yonik Seeley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Skickat: on 2006-05-17 20:04 Till: java-user@lucene.apache.org Ämne: Re: Changing the scoring (newest doc date first) On 5/16/06, Marcus Falck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm working on a very large implementation of a search engine based on the > lucene api (1.4.3). We have also been investigating enterprise search > companies such as FAST and Verity but have come to the conclusion that we > might aswell save ourselves 1 millon dollars by doing our own implementation > on lucene. That's the same conclusion we came to... and how Solr came about. If it is close enough to meeting your needs, it might make sense to collaborate. > So i figured since the default sort is by relevance i would like to change > the relevance so that we don't even need to sort the documents. Documents sorted by relevance are still sorted. How much slower is a sort on another field vs a sort on relevance (not counting the first time) -Yonik http://incubator.apache.org/solr Solr, the open-source Lucene search server --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
