On Thursday 20 September 2007 09:19, Mohammad Norouzi wrote: > well, you mean we should separate documents just like relational tables in > databases ?
Quite the contrary, it's called _de_normalization. This means that the documents in lucene normally contain more information than is present in a single relational entity. > if yes, how to make the relationship between those documents Lucene has no facilities to maintain relational relationships among its documents. A lucene index allows free format documents, i.e. any document may have any field or not. In practice you will need at least a primary key, but even that you will need to program yourself. Regards, Paul Elschot > > thank you so much Paul > > On 9/20/07, Paul Elschot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Thursday 20 September 2007 07:29, Mohammad Norouzi wrote: > > > Sorry Paul I just hurried in replying ;) > > > I read the documents of Lucene about query syntax and I figured out the > > what > > > is the difference > > > but my problem is different, this is preoccupied my mind and I am under > > > pressure to solve this problem, after analyzing the results I get, now I > > > think we need a "group by" in our query. > > > > > > let me tell you an example: we need a list of patients that have been > > > examined by certain services specified by the user , say service one and > > > service two. > > > > > > in this case here is the correct result: > > > patient-id service_name patient_result > > > 1 s1 12 > > > 1 s2 13 > > > 2 s1 41 > > > 2 s2 22 > > > > > > but for example, following is incorrect because patient 1 has no service > > > with name service2: > > > patient-id service_name patient_result > > > 1 s1 12 > > > 1 s3 13 > > > > That depends on what you put in your lucene documents. > > You can only get complete lucene documents as query results. > > For the above example a patient with all service names > > should be indexed in a single lucene doc. > > > > The rows above suggest that the relation between patient and > > service forms the relational result. However, for a text search > > engine it is usual to denormalize the relational records into > > indexed documents, depending on the required output. > > > > Regards, > > Paul Elschot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/20/07, Mohammad Norouzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Paul, > > > > would you tell me what is the difference between AND and + ? > > > > I tried both but get different result > > > > with AND I get 1777 documents and with + I get nearly 25000 ? > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/17/07, Paul Elschot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Monday 17 September 2007 11:40, Mohammad Norouzi wrote: > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > I have a problem in getting correct result from Lucene, consider > > we > > > > > have an > > > > > > index containing documents with fields "field1" and "field2" etc. > > now > > > > > I want > > > > > > to have documents in which their field1 are equal one by one and > > their > > > > > > field2 with two different value > > > > > > > > > > > > to clarify consider I have this query: > > > > > > field1:val* (field2:"myValue1" XOR field2:"myValue2") > > > > > > > > > > Did you try this: > > > > > > > > > > +field1:val* +field2:"myValue1" +field2:"myValue2" > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Paul Elschot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > now I want this result: > > > > > > field1 field2 > > > > > > val1 myValue1 > > > > > > val1 myValue2 > > > > > > val2 myValue1 > > > > > > val2 myValue2 > > > > > > > > > > > > this result is not acceptable: > > > > > > val3 myValue1 > > > > > > or > > > > > > val4 myValue1 > > > > > > val4 myValue3 > > > > > > > > > > > > I put XOR as operator because this is not a typical OR, it's > > > > > different, it > > > > > > means documents that contains both myValue1 and myValue2 for the > > field > > > > > > > > > > > field2 > > > > > > > > > > > > how to build a query to get such result? > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks in advance > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Mohammad > > > > > > -------------------------- > > > > > > see my blog: http://brainable.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > another in Persian: http://fekre-motefavet.blogspot.com/ > > > > > > Sun Certified Java Programmer > > > > > > ExpertsExchange Certified, Master: > > > > > > http://www.experts-exchange.com/M_1938796.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Regards, > > > > Mohammad > > > > -------------------------- > > > > see my blog: http://brainable.blogspot.com/ > > > > another in Persian: http://fekre-motefavet.blogspot.com/ > > > > Sun Certified Java Programmer > > > > ExpertsExchange Certified, Master: > > http://www.experts-exchange.com/M_1938796.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Regards, > > > Mohammad > > > -------------------------- > > > see my blog: http://brainable.blogspot.com/ > > > another in Persian: http://fekre-motefavet.blogspot.com/ > > > Sun Certified Java Programmer > > > ExpertsExchange Certified, Master: > > > http://www.experts-exchange.com/M_1938796.html > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Mohammad > -------------------------- > see my blog: http://brainable.blogspot.com/ > another in Persian: http://fekre-motefavet.blogspot.com/ > Sun Certified Java Programmer > ExpertsExchange Certified, Master: > http://www.experts-exchange.com/M_1938796.html > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
