Well the situatio is Luke 0.9.1 will show me a message "read pass EOF" when I opened index files made by Lucene.Net 2.3.1. But Luke 0.8 can smoothly do that for me.
2009/1/13 Granroth, Neal V. <neal.granr...@thermofisher.com> > > Floyd, you will need to provide more details about the specific problems > you are encountering. > > I made a quick check, and have no difficulty opening and inspecting an > index I created a few minutes ago with Lucene.NET v2.3.1 using Luke v0.9.1. > > -- Neal > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Floyd Wu [mailto:floyd...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 8:18 PM > To: lucene-net-user@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Lucene Scalability Options > > Hi all, > It seems new version of Luke is not compitable with Lucene.net and I've > email to the creator of Luke. Below is feedback from him > > "Yes, there have been many changes, > but Lucene 2.4 can still open indexes built with earlier versions of > Lucene/Java. > This is the second report I've got about the possible incompatibility with > Lucene.Net - > I suggest to raise up this issue on the Lucene mailing list ( > java-...@lucene.apache.org), > and provide more details, > eg. Lucene.Net revision, stack trace, a small sample index if you can." > > My original report as below > "The situation is Luke-0.9 can not open the index files which built by > Lucene.Net-2.3.1. > I tried to use older version of Luke and confirm Luke-0.8 and Luke-0.8.1 > can > open and read index files fine. > I wonder if there is any change between java Lucene 2.3 and 2.4. > Please help on this." > > Floyd > > > > 2009/1/9 George Aroush <geo...@aroush.net> > > > Hi Nitin, > > > > Any optimization that Luke can do on an index is also doable by making > API > > calls from Lucene.Net. If not, then there is either a bug in Lucene.Net > or > > in your use of the API. Can you share with us your API calls as well as > > the > > Lucene.Net version you are using? > > > > Thanks. > > > > -- George > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Nitin Shiralkar [mailto:nit...@coreobjects.com] > > > Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 6:27 AM > > > To: lucene-net-user@incubator.apache.org > > > Subject: RE: Lucene Scalability Options > > > > > > Thanks Hugh. Yes, I tried using Luke for index optimization. > > > Surprisingly, it has brought down the index size to ~20 GB > > > with only one CFS and segment files left behind. I used > > > compound optimization option. But I use the similar > > > "SetUseCompoundFile" property on "IndexModifier" object in my > > > Lucene.NET code, but it has no effect on size or files after > > > optimization. Any suggestions?? > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Hugh Spiller [mailto:hugh.spil...@renishaw.com] > > > Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 3:35 PM > > > To: lucene-net-user@incubator.apache.org > > > Subject: RE: Lucene Scalability Options > > > > > > Hi Nitin, > > > > > > I've found the easiest way to get rid of redundant files in > > > an index is to use Luke. As soon as you use it to open the > > > index, it tidies up all the cruft. > > > > > > It's at http://www.getopt.org/luke/ . > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > Hugh Spiller > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Nitin Shiralkar [mailto:nit...@coreobjects.com] > > > Sent: 09 January 2009 08:48 > > > To: lucene-net-user@incubator.apache.org > > > Subject: RE: Lucene Scalability Options > > > > > > -- snip -- > > > > > > > > > Any inputs on junk/redundant files in above list? > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ------------------------------------ > > > This email and any attachments are confidential and are for > > > the use of the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, > > > you must not use or disclose the contents to any other > > > person. Please immediately notify the sender and delete the > > > email. Statements and opinions expressed here may not > > > represent those of the company. Email correspondence is > > > monitored by the company. This information may be subject to > > > Export Control Regulation. You are obliged to comply with > > > such Regulations > > > > > > The parent company of the Renishaw Group is Renishaw plc, > > > registered in England no. 1106260. Registered Office: New > > > Mills, Wotton-under-Edge, Gloucestershire, GL12 8JR, United > > > Kingdom. Tel +44 (0) 1453 524524 > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > > >
