-1
I would like a few more days to get https://issues.apache.org/jira/
browse/LUCENE-762, as it may involve moving some classes and I don't
want to do that after an official release. It is not a major issue,
but I do think it is important to get right before the release.
Sorry for the
On 2/1/07, Thang Luong Minh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm thinking of replace the byte-aligned scheme with the fixed binary
coding scheme mentioned in the paper Index compression using Fixed Binary
Codewords by Vo Ngoc Anh and Alistair Moffat (the abstract can be found
here
Hi All,
I am new to LUCENE,I have an query that, I have to index a Product table,
Suppose that table has following Columns.
product [ prod_Id as primary key, prod_name, prod_price]
I have an requirement like if someone searches for prod_id or prod_price, I
have to fetch the rows(
On 1/25/07, Grant Ingersoll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike,
Do you have any preference on making FieldInfo public versus moving
the FieldSelector stuff into the index package?
Not at all. Our use is pretty basic as will be easy to modify to
conform to class movement/renaming.
-Mike
I have discovered a serious bug in QueryParser. The following query:
contents:sales contents:marketing || contents:industrial
contents:sales
is parsed as:
+contents:sales +contents:marketing +contents:industrial +contents:sales
The same parsed query occurs even with parenthesis:
On Feb 1, 2007, at 12:24 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
Welcome aboard, Michael!
So how about keeping the new-committer-introduction tradition
alive :-)
Here's a new tradition we can start...
Hi, my name is Erik, I write shitty code.
more then once, people have suggested that QueryParser should either throw
and Exception or implicitly put a MatchAllDocsQuery in any BooleanQuery it
produces when the string it's parsing contains entirely negative clauses.
I've argued against this idea because QueryParser doesn't know how the
