[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-955?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Busch resolved LUCENE-955.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Committed.
> Bug in SegmentTermPositions if used for first term in the dicti
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-951?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Busch resolved LUCENE-951.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Lucene Fields: [New, Patch Available] (was: [Patch Available, New])
C
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-724?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12512169
]
Michael Goddard commented on LUCENE-724:
Marcelo,
Are you still working on this? I have been experimenting
Let the numbers speak,
INDEX SIZE: 58Mio docs, 2.5G on disk
- two tokenized Fields, both with average 4 tokens (rather small), approx. 2Mio
unique tokens
- one binary stored field (one VInt)
- HW commodity AMD PC, 2.8Ghz (or so) 2G RAM, single disk, WIN XP 64bit, jvm
6.0 32bit
before LUCENE-84
My results have been fantastic as well (though not as fantastic as yours
-- I have larger docs and use StandardAnalzyer). Mr. McCandless has been
on a tear this year. A Lucene machine.
Kudos as well,
- Mark
eks dev wrote:
Let the numbers speak,
INDEX SIZE: 58Mio docs, 2.5G on disk
- two to
Hi,
I'm using MultiSearcher with 14 indexes. It's working ok, until i try to
search with a Filter.
Probable the best way to describe the problem is to give a small example:
Suppose we have 2 Indexes
Index1 {Doc(id:"A", content:".."), Doc(id:"B", content:"..")}
Index2 {Doc(id:"C", content:".."),
this because the MultiSearcher applies the
BitSet filter from the begging of the BitSet for each Index.
I just checked the code... you are correct, the MultiSearcher
filtering code is broken!
Could you please open a JIRA issue for this?
-Yonik
--
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-944?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Busch resolved LUCENE-944.
--
Resolution: Fixed
Lucene Fields: [New, Patch Available] (was: [Patch Available, New])
C
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-724?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12512212
]
Marcelo F. Ochoa commented on LUCENE-724:
-
Michel:
I am not tested replacing vector based storage to direct
Thank you for the compliments, and thank you for being such early
adopter testers! I'm very glad you didn't hit any issues :)
> before LUCENE-843 indexing speed was 5-6k records per second (and I
> believed this was already as fast as it gets)
> after (trunk version yesterday) 60-65k documents p
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-938?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12512249
]
Steven Parkes commented on LUCENE-938:
--
Easy first: there's a comment in the code about cloning the buf delete t
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-843?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12512264
]
Steven Parkes commented on LUCENE-843:
--
Did we lose the triggered merge stuff from 887, i.e.,, should it be
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-938?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12512271
]
Ning Li commented on LUCENE-938:
I didn't make myself clear. Let me try again. The patch includes two parts of
chang
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-938?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12512274
]
Steven Parkes commented on LUCENE-938:
--
Okay. Got it.
But your earlier note got me thinking. Mike, as far as I
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-843?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12512275
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-843:
---
Woops ... you are right; thanks for catching it! I will add a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-938?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12512287
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-938:
---
Ahh, right, we are not protecting buffered doc state inside th
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-938?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12512289
]
Steven Parkes commented on LUCENE-938:
--
Works for me. I'll submit a new patch.
> I/O exceptions can cause loss
Lucene RAM Directory doesn't work for Index Size > 8 GB
---
Key: LUCENE-957
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-957
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Bug
Components
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-938?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Steven Parkes updated LUCENE-938:
-
Attachment: LUCENE-938.patch.txt
New patch. Removes support for buf deletes around transactions b
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-957?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Doron Cohen updated LUCENE-957:
---
Attachment: lucene-957.patch
Patch fixing int / long cast issues in RAMInputStream.
All tests pass b
MultiSearcher Filtering with more than one index is broken
--
Key: LUCENE-958
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-958
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Bug
Comp
21 matches
Mail list logo
