My first post so please be gentle with me.
I am about to start 'playing' with Solr to see if it will be the correct
tool for a new searchable database development. One of my requirements is
the ability to do 'fuzzy' searches and I understand that the latest versions
of Lucene / Solr use an improv
In our old code, we create the filed like this.
Field metaField = new Field(name,strVal,fldDef.store,
Index.NOT_ANALYZED_NO_NORMS);
metaField.setOmitNorms(true);
*metaField.setIndexOptions(IndexOptions.DOCS_ONLY);*
luceneDoc.add(metaFi
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Anna Björk Nikulásdóttir
wrote:
> I created these 3 issues for the discussed items:
Thanks! If you (or anyone!) want to work up a patch that would be great ...
> Thanks a lot for your suggestions (pun intended) ;)
;)
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless
Hi Mike,
Thanks for your quick response.
All data was newly indexed, so compatibility is not the culprit.
Is it possible a multi-thread issue? I use shared IndexReaders between
different IndexSearchers. No evidence for this guess because I have many
multi-thread test cases and they passed, but t
I created these 3 issues for the discussed items:
On disk FST objects:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5174
FuzzySuggester should boost terms with minimal Levenshtein Distance:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5172
AnalyzingSuggester and FuzzySuggester should be able to
Hello,
I generally add fields to my document in the following manner.
I wish to add offsets to this field.
doc.add(new StringField("contents",line,Field.Store.YES));
I wish to also store offsets. So, I went through javadoc, and found I
need to use FieldType.
So, I ended up using :
All span queries require positions to work; older Lucene released
failed to catch you if you tried to use a span query on a field that
did not index positions, but now Lucene 4.x does catch you (this is an
improvement).
You should double check your unit test: it really should not have been
passing
One of my UT is passed In lucene 3.5, but it is failed in lucene4.3.
The exception is:
IllegalStateException("field \"" + term.field() + "\" was indexed without
position data; cannot run SpanTermQuery (term=" + term.text() + ")");
After I change index option of the field from DOCS_ONLY to
DOCS_A
DiskDVFormat does not have index back compatibility between minor
releases; maybe that's what you are seeing? So, you must fully
re-index after any DiskDVFormat field after upgrading ...
Only the default formats support index back compatibility between releases.
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mik
I'm currently using this snippet (with older Highlighter):
HitPositionCollector collector = new HitPositionCollector();
highlighter = new Highlighter(collector,
scorer);
highlighter.setTextFragmenter(new
SimpleSpanFragmenter(scorer,
remedialaction != "remedial action"?
Show us your query. Show a small self-contained sample program or
test case that demonstrates the problem. You need to give us
something more to go on.
--
Ian.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Ankit Murarka
wrote:
> Hello,
> I am aware of that l
Hello,
I am aware of that link and I have been through that link many
number of times.
Problem I have is:
1. Each line is indexed. So indexed line looks something like
"\"
2. I am easily firing a phrase query on this line. It suggest me the
possible values. No problem,.
3. If I fire
If you use PostingsHighlighter, then Passage.getMatchStarts/Ends gives
you the offsets of each match. You'd need a custom PassageFormatter
that takes these ints and saves them somewhere; or possibly the patch
on LUCENE-4906 (allowing you to return custom objects, not just
String) from your highlig
I'm not sure what you're getting at. If you've got one job reading
data, writing to an output file and indexing as you go, it should
work. If you've got multiple jobs trying to write to the same output
file and lucene index you'll need some external synchronisation.
--
Ian.
On Tue, Aug 13, 20
Probably, Last doubt:
The data in my application is coming from a stream after performing some
functionality.
This stream is getting continously written in the file.
So , effectively, if I open a lucene index and create indexes using this
file, I would be able to create the indexes ..??? Wo
Should be straightforward enough. Work through the tips in the FAQ
entry at
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/LuceneFAQ#Why_am_I_getting_no_hits_.2F_incorrect_hits.3F
and post back if that doesn't help, with details of how you are
analyzing the data and how you are searching.
--
Ian.
On Tue,
Hi experts,
I'm upgrading Lucene 4.4 and trying to use DocValues instead of store field
for performance reason. But due to unknown size of index(depends on
customer), so I will use DiskDocValuesFormat, especially for some binary
field. Then I wrote my customized Codec:
final Codec codec = n
If I've understood your question correctly, the answer is yes.
Assuming the input data is coming from another file the flow will be
along the lines of
. Open input file for reading
. Open output file for writing
. Open (or create) lucene index
. For each input record
- write to output file
That only answer my 2nd part.
My most important question still remains.
"
In my code case, I am creating a new file and writing data to that file.
Now, when the file writing is in progress, I would like to create Lucene
Indexes. Once indexes are created, I can then perform operation on the
ind
Hello All,
I have 2 different usecases.
I am trying to provide both boolean query and phrase search query in the
application.
In every line of the document which I am indexing I have content like :
\
Due to the phrase search requirement, I am indexing each line of the
file as
20 matches
Mail list logo
