Search agents

2006-01-04 Thread karl wettin
Hello list, I wrote a search agent thingy for Lucene. It was built to handle huge amounts of agents. Rather than one query per agent to find out if the new document is interesting or not, agent trigger queries are stored in an index that is queried with the tokens of a new document.

Re: Search agents

2006-01-04 Thread Erik Hatcher
Karl, Have you considered the MemoryIndex for this sort of thing? I've thought that it would make for an elegant way to handle this sort of agent or notification service such that new documents get indexed normally, but also a single document goes into a MemoryIndex and is matched

Re: Search agents

2006-01-04 Thread mark harwood
Yes, I've found MemoryIndex to be very fast for this kind of thing. This contribution can be used to further optimize and shortlist the queries to be run against the new document sat in MemoryIndex. ___ To help you stay

Re: Advanced query language

2006-01-04 Thread mark harwood
This example code looks interesting. If I understand correctly using this approach requires that builders like the q QueryObjectBuilder instance must be explicitly registered with each and every builder that consumes its type of output eg BQOB and FQOB. An alternative would be to register q just

Re: indexreader refresh

2006-01-04 Thread Doug Cutting
Amol Bhutada wrote: If I have a reader and searcher on a indexdata folder and another indexwriter writing documents to the same indexdata folder, do I need to close existing reader and searcher and create new so that newly indexed data comes into search effect? [ moved from user to dev list]

RE: indexreader refresh

2006-01-04 Thread Robert Engels
I proposed and posted a patch for this long ago. Only thing missing would be some sort of reference courting for segments (rather than the 'stayopen' flag). /** * reopens the IndexReader, possibly reusing the segments for greater efficiency. The original IndexReader instance * is closed,

Re: Advanced query language

2006-01-04 Thread Chris Hostetter
: This example code looks interesting. If I understand : correctly using this approach requires that builders : like the q QueryObjectBuilder instance must be : explicitly registered with each and every builder that : consumes its type of output eg BQOB and FQOB. An correct. : provider for the

[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-478) CJK char list

2006-01-04 Thread Steven Rowe (JIRA)
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-478?page=comments#action_12361804 ] Steven Rowe commented on LUCENE-478: There are six classes of issues: 1. A character range in StandardTokenizer.jj that is missing in John's list, and should be left

[jira] Created: (LUCENE-483) QueryParser.getFieldQuery(String,String) doesn't set default slop on MultiPhraseQuery

2006-01-04 Thread Hoss Man (JIRA)
QueryParser.getFieldQuery(String,String) doesn't set default slop on MultiPhraseQuery - Key: LUCENE-483 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-483 Project: Lucene - Java

[jira] Updated: (LUCENE-483) QueryParser.getFieldQuery(String,String) doesn't set default slop on MultiPhraseQuery

2006-01-04 Thread Hoss Man (JIRA)
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-483?page=all ] Hoss Man updated LUCENE-483: Attachment: LUCENE-483.patch patch containing test changes demonstrating the problem, and the fix in both QueryParser.jj and QueryParser.java

Save to database...

2006-01-04 Thread Aditya Liviandi
How would I go about altering lucene so that the index is saved to a database instead? (or has it been done? Wouldn't want to reinvent the wheel there.) -- This email is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended