Re: Generalized proximity query performance

2007-10-07 Thread Chris Hostetter
: If I could intelligently rewrite queries, this would be better formulated : as: : title:"harry potter"~5 genre:books : : Instead, since I don't have that knowledge, I should perhaps rewrite several : guesses, and take the dismax. These guesses are equivalent to passing the right. okay. the b

Re: Generalized proximity query performance

2007-10-05 Thread Kyle Maxwell
> > Hmmm.. can you give some more concrete examples of what you mean by this? > both in terms of the use case you are trying to satisfy, and in terms of > how your current code works ... you don't have to post code or give away > trade secrets, just describe it as a black box (ie: what is the input

Re: Generalized proximity query performance

2007-10-05 Thread Mike Klaas
On 5-Oct-07, at 11:27 AM, Chris Hostetter wrote: that's what i thought first too, and it is a problem i'd eventaully like to tackle ... it was the part about "c" being in a differnet field from "a" and "b" that confused me ... i don't know what that exactly is being suggested here. I'm

Re: Generalized proximity query performance

2007-10-05 Thread Chris Hostetter
: > : would like to allow for the possibility that a and b are near each other : > in : > : one field, while c is in another field. : I understand the OP to want a PhraseQuery that has an intention (rather than : side-effect) of doing proximity-based scoring. : : "phrase query here"~1000 is the

Re: Generalized proximity query performance

2007-10-05 Thread Mike Klaas
On 5-Oct-07, at 10:54 AM, Chris Hostetter wrote: : I am using a hand rolled query of the following form (implemented with : SpanNearQuery, not a sloppy PhraseQuery): : a b c => +(a AND b AND c) OR "a b"~5 OR "b c"~5 : : The obvious solution, "a b c"~5, is not applicable for my issues, becaus

Re: Generalized proximity query performance

2007-10-05 Thread Chris Hostetter
: I am using a hand rolled query of the following form (implemented with : SpanNearQuery, not a sloppy PhraseQuery): : a b c => +(a AND b AND c) OR "a b"~5 OR "b c"~5 : : The obvious solution, "a b c"~5, is not applicable for my issues, because I : would like to allow for the possibility that a an

Generalized proximity query performance

2007-10-03 Thread Kyle Maxwell
Hi again,As the subject would suggest I'm trying to implement a layer of proximity weighting over lucene. This has greatly increased search relevance, but at the same time has knocked down performance by a substantial amount (see footer). I am using a hand rolled query of the following form (impl