[jira] Resolved: (LUCENE-1134) BooleanQuery.rewrite does not work properly for minNumberShouldMatch

2008-02-03 Thread Michael Busch (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1134?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Busch resolved LUCENE-1134. --- Resolution: Fixed Lucene Fields: [New, Patch Available] (was: [Patch Available, New])

[jira] Updated: (LUCENE-584) Decouple Filter from BitSet

2008-02-03 Thread Paul Elschot (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Paul Elschot updated LUCENE-584: Attachment: CHANGES.txt.patch Thanks, my pleasure. I have attached a patch to CHANGES.txt to expli

[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1026) Provide a simple way to concurrently access a Lucene index from multiple threads

2008-02-03 Thread Mark Miller (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1026?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12565174#action_12565174 ] Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1026: - The last ZIP has an incomplete Reading IndexRea

[jira] Resolved: (LUCENE-1151) Fix StandardAnalyzer to not mis-identify HOST as ACRONYM by default

2008-02-03 Thread Michael McCandless (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1151?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael McCandless resolved LUCENE-1151. Resolution: Fixed > Fix StandardAnalyzer to not mis-identify HOST as ACRONYM by de

ApacheCon Europe BoF for Lucene/Nutch/Solr

2008-02-03 Thread Grant Ingersoll
If you are planning on going to ApacheCon Europe, you might be interested in joining some fellow Lucene/Solr/Nutch people at the BoF: http://wiki.apache.org/apachecon/BirdsOfaFeatherEu08 Just note your interest in the "Interested People Counter" section. Also note, there are several talks a

high lookup time on single lucene index

2008-02-03 Thread phiras
Hi, We have a single Lucene index consist of 4.5 million document with 20 million different term. The lookup time is too high , (more than 3 seconds) for a none-simple boolean query, this high lookup time is not acceptable. We did a simple test to figure out the relation between ( documents count

Re: high lookup time on single lucene index

2008-02-03 Thread Grant Ingersoll
Have a look at http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/BasicsOfPerformance Your times sound pretty high, but it depends on the complexity of the query, etc. Can you share information about your queries, etc.? Are you opening the IndexSearcher on every query? -Grant On Feb 3, 2008, at 12:24 PM

Re: high lookup time on single lucene index

2008-02-03 Thread phiras
In fact we are following lucene performance hints ( http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/BasicsOfPerformance ) Our queries are not that complicated , we are expanding user query, let's say between 2 to 5 new keyword for each keyword in the user query. in the test we did , queries are not more than

Re: svn commit: r617991 - /lucene/java/trunk/contrib/benchmark/src/java/org/apache/lucene/benchmark/byTask/PerfRunData.java

2008-02-03 Thread Doron Cohen
Mike, do you think this should be done only when eraseIndex=true ? On Sun, Feb 3, 2008 at 4:24 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Author: mikemccand > Date: Sun Feb 3 06:24:30 2008 > New Revision: 617991 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=617991&view=rev > Log: > when reinit() is called, re

[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-584) Decouple Filter from BitSet

2008-02-03 Thread Michael Busch (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12565285#action_12565285 ] Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-584: -- {quote} I have attached a patch to CHANGES.txt