I was actually thinking of creating a separate index with only the extra field and them modify the other index (change some files etc.)
Sounds hacky. Dunno if its possible. Thanks -john On Jan 31, 2008 9:36 AM, Erick Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As always, "it depends". You can try to reconstruct the doc from an index, > see Luke. But depending upon you you indexed things, it may be more > or less lossy. I remember this was discussed recently, you might have > some luck if you search the archive. > > But it may be very, very expensive to reconstruct all the docs from an > index, see how long Luke takes to do this on your index..... > > If you stored all the fields in addition to indexing them, then there's > no problem since the stored fields *are* what you indexed. > > How did you create your original index? > > Erick > > On Jan 31, 2008 12:28 PM, John Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I have to keep one index though. Is there a way to reproduce an index > from > > an indexReader? > > > > -John > > > > On Jan 31, 2008 1:30 AM, Michael McCandless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Just beware, though, that with ParallelReader you must ensure that > > > the internal docIDs of both indices remain "aligned" over time. > > > > > > If you never do deletions, then that happens for free. > > > > > > If you do deletions, then, you must change IndexWriter to buffer by > > > doc count (same doc count for all writhers), and, you must change the > > > merge policy to LogDocMergePolicy. You also might need to switch to > > > SerialMergeScheduler if you ever allow readers to refresh against the > > > indices while a writer is still open. If you don't do that (ie > > > reader can only re-open after a writer is closed) then it's safe to > > > stick with ConcurrentMergeScheduler. > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > On Jan 31, 2008, at 4:23 AM, Doron Cohen wrote: > > > > > > > This may help: > > > > http://www.nabble.com/Updating-Lucene-Index-with-Unstored-fields- > > > > tt15188818.html#a15188818 > > > > > > > > Doron > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 2:42 AM, John Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi all: > > > >> > > > >> We have a large index and it is difficult to reindex. > > > >> > > > >> We want to add another field to the index without reindexing, > > > >> e.g. just > > > >> create a new inverted index, dictionary files etc. > > > >> > > > >> How feasible is it to add this to lucene? > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Thanks > > > >> > > > >> -John > > > >> > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > >
