implications, of course, but you get the
idea
There are a zillion possibilities here in terms of combining various
filterFactories
Best
Erick
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Becker, Thomas thomas.bec...@netapp.com
wrote:
Sorry, at indexing time it's not broken on anything. In other words
is actually as simple as this example. Do you need to
tokenize on whitespace? Would it make sense to replace spaces in the query
with underscores and then trigramify the whole query as if it were a single
term?
From: Becker, Thomas [thomas.bec
is broken on _
already, then NGramFilter already receives the individual terms and you can put
a Filter in front that will pass through a padded token?
Shai
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Becker, Thomas thomas.bec...@netapp.comwrote:
In general the data for this field is that simple
One of our main use-cases for search is to find objects based on partial name
matches. I've implemented this using n-grams and it works pretty well.
However we're currently using trigrams and that causes an interesting problem
when searching for things like abc ab since we first split on
might consider something like ReversedWildcardFilterFactory (Solr) to speed
this type of matching.
I look forward to other opinions from the list.
-Original Message-
From: Becker, Thomas [mailto:thomas.bec...@netapp.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 3:55 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Sounds like you need a PhraseQuery.
-Original Message-
From: madan mp [mailto:madan20...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 7:40 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: query on exact match in lucene
how to get exact string match
ex- i am searching for file which consist of
I'm relatively new to Lucene and am in the process of upgrading from 4.0 to
4.3.1. I'm trying to figure out if I need to leave my version at LUCENE_40 or
if it is safe to change it to LUCENE_43. Does this parameter directly
determine the index format? I have some existing indexes from 4.0
We are doing some crash resiliency testing of our application. One of the
things we found is that the Lucene index seems to get out of sync with the
database pretty easily. I suspect this is because we are using near real time
readers and never actually calling IndexWriter.commit(). I'm
I've built a search prototype feature for my application using Lucene, and it
works great. The application monitors a remote system and currently indexes
just a few core attributes of the objects on that system. I get notifications
when objects change, and I then update the Lucene index to
