This sounds like a good solution, but may not be viable in my situation. I think I might run into problems since my index changes very often; several times an hour. I don't think it would be very efficient to rebuild the field mapped array after each new document is incrementally added to the index. A solution could be to only remap them each day or each hour, but unfortunately I need the documents available for searching as soon they are indexed. I plan to experiment with this solution when time permits. I will let you know how it goes or if I come up with any other ideas.
Regards, Jeff -----Original Message----- From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 5:47 PM To: 'Lucene Users List' Subject: RE: Sorting Options for Query Results This is not easy to do efficiently. The efficiency of the search code depends on not constructing Document objects for every match. Thus it is hard to efficiently perform calculations which require field values. Things are easy if you need date order, and you have added documents in date order. In this case you can use the document number passed to the hit collector, since document numbers increase linearly as documents are added to an index. Hits are in fact passed to the hit collector in document-number order, so you don't even have to sort. But if you need another ordering, besides by-score or by-addition-time, you will have to do more work. The most efficient approach is to construct an array mapping document numbers to the value you wish to sort by. Then use this array in your hit collector. The array can be re-used by many queries, but must be re-constructed when documents are added or removed from the index. Such an array can be constructed with a TermEnum() and TermDocs(), as illustrated in some pseudo code I sent out earlier today. Note that, in a hit collector, it is more efficient to maintain a set of the top-N hits rather than collecting all hits, sorting, and then taking the top-N. IndexSearcher.search() illustrates how this should be done when sorting by score. Probably this should be generalized into a HitsByField class: public class HitsByField { private String[] fieldValues; private Searcher searcher; public HitsByField(String field, IndexReader reader) { ... construct fieldValues array per previous message ... searcher = new IndexSearcher(reader); } private class ByFieldCollector implements HitCollector { String minValue = ""; TreeMap topHits = new TreeMap(); int maxHits; int totalHits; public ByFieldCollector(int maxHits) { this.maxHits = maxHits; } public collect(int doc, float score) { totalHits++; String value = fieldValues[doc]; if (minValue.compareTo(value) < 0) { topHits.put(value, new Integer(doc)); if (topHits.size() > maxHits) { topHits.remove(topHits.firstKey()); minValue = (String)topHits.firstKey(); } } } public int getHits(Document[] hits) { ... put topHits in hits, using searcher.doc() ... return totalHits; } } /** Returns the total number of hits. Stores top hits in hits. */ public int search(Query query, Document[] hits) { ByFieldCollector collector = new ByFieldCollector(hits.length); searcher.search(query, collector); return collector.getHits(hits); } } I leave it as an excercise for someone to fill in the blanks and post a complete, debugged version of this. If it's useful, we can add it to Lucene. Doug > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Kunkle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 2:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Sorting Options for Query Results > > > Hello. Does anyone know of a way to sort search results other than by > score? It seems like it would be very useful to be able to > sort by date or > maybe even by any field that has been indexed (which I guess > would include a > date). From what I can tell, Lucene does not provide any way > to do this > beyond writing your own HitCollector. Is this correct? If > so, has anyone > had any luck implementing alternate sorting methods? I have > just started > experimenting with Lucene so any help is greatly appreciated. > > Thanks, > Jeff > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
