I have been using it in production for a while now. It seems very solid. If
I had a vote I would say lets mark it as final and move on to v2.2.
Jeff
On Dec 10, 2007 9:47 PM, George Aroush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I just labeled Lucene.Net 2.1 build 3 as "R
so noticed considerable
performance degradation when an index passes a certain size threshold, i.e.
300MB on the given system I'm working with. (We break our aggregate index
out to multiple individual indexes for the best mix of indexing and search
performance.)
Hope this helps.
-- jeff r.
Hi Ali -
Please send these messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The dev
mailing list is for Lucene.Net developers within Apache, not general
developers using Lucene.Net.
By parsing the expression, what input/output are you looking for? Can you
provide a sample?
-- j
On 5/3/06, Ali Khawaja <[EMAIL P
Looking at this from a bit broader perspective, this opens up a bigger
conversation.
While working to implement a third-party hook-by-reflection process into the
code, the .NET 2.0 framework already contains the appropriate classes to
handle compression. While there's a need for .NET 1.1 complia
Does "compatible" equal the ability for a Java implementation of Lucene to
open/read/write to an index created in Lucene.Net?
On 5/15/06, George Aroush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jeff,
We need compression support in Lucene.Net 1.9 using .NET 1.1 otherwise 1.9
can't b
George - thanks for the clarification.
-- j
On 5/15/06, George Aroush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jeff,
Yes, "compatible" does mean the index can be open/read/write/etc. to when
created with Java/C# Lucene. This is already is the case with 1.4.x and
must remain so for 1.9
more "correct" and will also perform better.
>
> Eyal
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: George Aroush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 21:54 PM
> > To: lucene-net-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: Compression I
Hi Ed -
For future reference, these questions are intended to be directed to the
lucene-net-user mailing list.
When iterating on your Hits collection, call Hits.Score() the same way you
call Hits.Doc() -- by passing it the index value (int) for your loop
iteration.
On 5/18/06, Ed Jones <[EMAIL
Hi Pamela -
Performance certainly changes as your index grows, and it's not even
necessarily a linear progression. How you indexed your data, compression
factors, compound vs. loose file format, number of indexes, etc. all play a
part in affecting search performance at runtime.
There are a lot
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/lucene/java-user/11999?search_string=minmergedocs;#11999
.
-- j
On 5/19/06, Pamela Foxcroft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks Jeff, I am a little confused by the compound vs loose file format
you
speak of.
We are indexing html docs and indexing 10 m
oxcroft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jeff
A couple more questions. Don't the merge parameters determine how
aggressively the index is compacted? And if so, doesn't this affect only
indexing performance and not search performance?
Secondly how large should each index be? Should I be parti
glean, trial-and-error proved to be the most
effective manner in determining what to do and how to do it.
-- j
On 5/19/06, Pamela Foxcroft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK, I'm very confused here Jeff. It sound like what you are suggesting is
that you have multiple indexes per machine
, consider not doing it. The goal is to keep the index size as
small
> as possible to reduce I/O.
>
> Good luck.
>
> -- George Aroush
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Rodenburg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 4:28 PM
> To: lucene-net-de
iciencies of scale.
-- j
On 5/22/06, George Aroush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Pam and Jeff,
You can't load 7Gb of index into memory. A typical Windows application
can't access more then 2Gb of RAM -- so if a machine has 8Gg and only
Lucene
is running chance are that you still hav
Hi Soormash -
This sounds like a corrupt index. I've seen this with an index that wasn't
properly closed or an indexing update didn't complete entirely. Try using
the Luke index interrogation tool (Java app) for evaluating your index and
see if it's still readable.
-- j
On 5/22/06, George Aro
ed for your particular data field. The fewer data
fields you need, the smaller the index, the better the performance.
Thanks to you and Jeff for all of your help! I really appreciate it!
That's why the list is here. :-)
-- j
On 5/23/06, Pamela Foxcroft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
e 1.1 Framework, I'm going to
proceed on porting the Java 2.0 release to C# under the 2.0 Framework. If
there are a substantial number of bugfixes in the 2.0 release, we should
make use of that as well.
Questions or comments welcome.
cheers,
jeff r.
-- Forwarded Message -
e 1.9 release. I'm not sure
there's any value in the claim of a 1.9 release any more than a non-complete
1.9 release. Nonetheless, I've received some offers to help review
the 2.0release, and will respond to those people privately.
cheers,
jeff r.
On 5/29/06, George Aroush <[E
the latest release up and running, the better.
So as to not dissuade attention from the 1.9 release, I'll keep any
conversation about the 2.0 release and the 2.0 Framework off the list.
cheers,
jeff r.
On 5/30/06, George Aroush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jeff and all,
I was th
little cleanup of our customization work, so my response may not be
immediate but I would make efforts to release the code in short order.
thanks,
jeff r.
On 8/19/06, Robert Boulanger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Elena, hi Rest,
> Dear All,
>
> The application I am working on i
it makes
sense (different code running in different places.
I'll start with this tonight, and try to get something out in the next few
days.
cheers,
jeff r.
On 8/21/06, George Aroush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jeff,
If you want to contribute the code, I am sure many can benefit from
nformation to relay, I'll pass it along to the list.
cheers,
jeff r.
On 8/21/06, Jeff Rodenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello all -
I've been watching this thread to follow the direction and thought I might
be able to offer some assistance. I run a search system that
so I'm working diligently
to explain how this works. If anyone has a place to hold the code until the
uber-powers at apache decide to grant me access, we would greatly appreciate
the assistance.
cheers,
jeff r.
On 8/23/06, Jeff Rodenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just a follow-up to
That's likely our only option for now. I believe George would need to do
the posting; I'm not aware of anyone else with commit access.
As long as the turnaround is rapid and it doesn't present an admin burden,
I'm ok with it.
-- j
On 8/27/06, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTEC
stion to basically have garoush upload the code on my
behalf to the contrib section at apache. If that can get turned around
quickly, I might go that route.
-- j
On 8/26/06, Saurabh Dani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jeff,
What type of "place to hold" are you
ing the code to include
proper comments throughout, as well as supporting documents for making it
all work together. Is there a specific flavor of Nunit to look for, or is
the most recent acceptable?
cheers,
jeff
On 8/28/06, George Aroush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have no problem addin
tting in the way. Again, I'll
share an announcement to the list when I've made the files available.
Thanks,
jeff r.
On 8/26/06, Jeff Rodenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As promised, an update to the list.
I have code ready for delivery, if I can get svn access to the cont
Hi George -
About a year ago we had a memory leak around some issues with the
1.4.3code. A few of us wrote some sample programs that manifested the
error, but
I was able to do a fair amount of sleuthing with Memprofiler (
http://memprofiler.com/). It's a pretty good tool for $100.
-- j
On 9/1
experience and suggestions, feel free to
ping me. :-)
cheers,
jeff r.
On 9/7/06, Jeff Rodenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All -
Another update on the remote searching application code that's been
mentioned in this thread. I'm near completion of the entire collection of
files tha
e. Rather than continue to
update the list with notifications about a lack of progress, I've opted to
attempt to address those issues and make an announcement when I'd reached
success.
So, no news for now.
thanks,
jeff
On 12/3/06, Robert Boulanger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jef
taking
on the task, just to be aware of some of the complexities that could underly
such an endeavor.
Take a look at the SolrSharp library if you have the cycles.
cheers,
jeff r.
On 8/2/07, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Why port Solr? It is a "web service"
Has there ever been any discussion to port Hadoop to .NET as well? Or
is anyone aware of a C# map/reduce project?
thanks,
j
Reporter: Jeff
Attachments: DateTools.patch
When using StringToDate(System.String dateString), it tries to create an
invalid date with month and day = 0.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-55?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-55:
--
Attachment: DateTools.patch
This patch resolves the issue and passes nunit tests.
> Documents.DateTools
Incorrect file in TestLockFactory.RmDir()
-
Key: LUCENENET-56
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-56
Project: Lucene.Net
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Jeff
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-56?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-56:
--
Attachment: TestLockFactory.patch
Here is a patch to only use the full filename. a few more nunit tests pass
DocHelper in Tests not creating UTF8 Cleanly
Key: LUCENENET-57
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-57
Project: Lucene.Net
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Jeff
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-57?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-57:
--
Attachment: DocHelper.patch
here is a patch that resolves the issue.
> DocHelper in Tests not creating U
Type: Bug
Reporter: Jeff
Priority: Minor
Attachments: CheckHits.patch
in CheckHits.CheckHitCollector() there is an assert to a hashtable. c# doesn't
support this.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-58?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-58:
--
Attachment: CheckHits.patch
This patch loops through the hashtable performing an Assert. Also.. This fixed
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-58?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-58:
--
Attachment: CheckHits.patch2
Here is a new patch that fixes the problem the original fixed and another
QueryUtils has some invalid Asserts
---
Key: LUCENENET-59
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-59
Project: Lucene.Net
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Jeff
Priority: Minor
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-59?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-59:
--
Attachment: QueryUtils.patch
This patch fixes NUnit failures in QueryUtils.
> QueryUtils has some inva
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-59?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-59:
--
Attachment: QueryUtils.patch2
Opps.. first patch had more than just this fix in it. QueryUtils.patch2 has
Issue testing Backwards Compatibility
-
Key: LUCENENET-61
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-61
Project: Lucene.Net
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Jeff
Priority: Minor
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-61?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-61:
--
Attachment: TestBackwardsCompatibility.patch
This test passes all Backward Compatibility NUnit Tests
: Bug
Reporter: Jeff
Priority: Minor
There is no check to see if the Directory Exists before it checks for the index
files, it just throws an error.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-62?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-62:
--
Attachment: IndexReader.patch
This patch checks to see if the directory exists before it checks the Index
FieldCacheImpl tries to parse a float in f format.
---
Key: LUCENENET-63
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-63
Project: Lucene.Net
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Jeff
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-63?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-63:
--
Attachment: FieldCacheImpl.patch
This fix trim's the string for f's at the end.
public vir
TestDateFilter incorrectly gets total milliseconds
--
Key: LUCENENET-64
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-64
Project: Lucene.Net
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Jeff
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-64?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-64:
--
Attachment: TestDateFilter.patch
This patch uses total milliseconds. This is obtained by the following
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-59?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12519761
]
Jeff commented on LUCENENET-59:
---
I would agree.. however the only reason why it is failing is because an
arraylist
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-69?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-69:
--
Attachment: FSDirectory.patch
Here is the patch that resolves this issue.
> FSIndexInput.isFDValid()
FSIndexInput.isFDValid() not ported correctly
-
Key: LUCENENET-69
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-69
Project: Lucene.Net
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Jeff
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-59?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-59:
--
Attachment: QueryUtils.patch3
Here is a new patch that only checks Query.ToString() since you can't Ass
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-59?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-59:
--
Attachment: TestBoolean2.patch
This patch uses TrimToSize() in in the TestBooleans2 Tests on an array to
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Jeff
Priority: Minor
DisjunctionMaxQuery.Clone() clones the DisjunctionMaxQuery then the disjuncts
arraylist. When cloning the disjuncts arraylist it causes the unit tests to
fail. disjuncts are cloned with cloning the query, so this is
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-76?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-76:
--
Attachment: DisjunctionMaxQuery.patch
> DisjunctionMaxQuery has unnecessary clone which causes it to f
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-78?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12520322
]
Jeff commented on LUCENENET-78:
---
is a tick a millisecond? I thought it was a nanosecond. LUCENENET-64 solves
this
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-61?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff reopened LUCENENET-61:
---
This patch didn't get applied correctly. for some reason the line:
entries = zipFile.Entries();
w
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-61?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff updated LUCENENET-61:
--
Attachment: TestBackwardCompatibility.patch2
This patch removes the line:
entries = zipFile.Entries
e testing Backwards Compatibility
> -
>
> Key: LUCENENET-61
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-61
> Project: Lucene.Net
> Issue Type: Bug
>Reporter: Jeff
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-63?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12521297
]
Jeff commented on LUCENENET-63:
---
This fixes unit tests in Search/TestSort/:
TestAutoSort
TestMultiSort
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-95?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12526520
]
Jeff commented on LUCENENET-95:
---
For what it's worth... I just got the latest version from SVN and this test
p
Project: Lucene.Net
Issue Type: Improvement
Environment: Visual Studio 2008 with .NET framework 3.5
Reporter: Jeff Johnson
Priority: Minor
I have been using the java luke tool for comparing query times with java vs C#
and the java query time is consistantly
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-192?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12752706#action_12752706
]
Jeff Johnson commented on LUCENENET-192:
What about if you get 10M
67 matches
Mail list logo
