Using Lucene to store document

2004-11-09 Thread Nhan Nguyen Dang
Hi all, I'm using Lucene to index XML document/ file (may be millions of documents in future, each about 5-10KB) Beside the index for searching, I want to use Lucene to store whole document content with UnIndexed fields -content field(instead of store each document in a XML file). All the

Re: Need Help

2004-11-09 Thread Chandrashekhar
Hi, Thank you for help. I got solution for this. lucene 1.3 index works with clucene 0.8.12 - Original Message - From: Otis Gospodnetic [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Lucene Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 11:01 PM Subject: Re: Need Help Hello, You should

Searching in keyword field ?

2004-11-09 Thread Thierry Ferrero (Itldev.info)
Hi All, Can i search only one word in a keyword field which contains few words. I know keyword field isn't tokenized. After many tests, i think is impossible. Someone can confirm me ? Why don't i use a text field? because the users know the category from a list (ex: category ABC, category DEF

Re: Searching in keyword field ?

2004-11-09 Thread Justin Swanhart
You can add the category keyword multiple times to a document. Instead of seperating your categories with a delimiter, just add the keyword multiple times. doc.add(Field.Keyword(category, ABC); doc.add(Field.Keyword(category, DEF GHI); On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 17:18:19 +0100, Thierry Ferrero

Re: Using Lucene to store document

2004-11-09 Thread Otis Gospodnetic
It is difficult to give a general answer. You can certainly store the whole XML in the Lucene index, just don't tokenize it. The HEAD version of Lucene even has some compression that you may find handy. On the other hand, storing XML in the FS would allow you to store XML files wherever you

What is the difference between these searches?

2004-11-09 Thread Luke Francl
Hi, I've implemented a converter to translate our system's internal Query objects to Lucene's Query model. I recently realized that my implementation of OR NOT was not working as I would expect and I was wondering if anyone on this list could give me some advice. I am converting a query that

Re: What is the difference between these searches?

2004-11-09 Thread Erik Hatcher
On Nov 9, 2004, at 2:58 PM, Luke Francl wrote: I recently realized that my implementation of OR NOT was not working as I would expect and I was wondering if anyone on this list could give me some advice. Lucene's BooleanQuery does not really have the concept of OR NOT. It's really an AND NOT. I

can lucene be backed to have an update field

2004-11-09 Thread Chris Fraschetti
Is it possible to modify the lucene source to create an updateDocument(doc#, FIELD, value) function ? I know there's a lot of work that goes on being the scene when an .add(doc) is called, but can some of that functionality be adapter to make the update a reality? -Chris

Re: What is the difference between these searches?

2004-11-09 Thread Paul Elschot
Luke, On Tuesday 09 November 2004 20:58, you wrote: Hi, I've implemented a converter to translate our system's internal Query objects to Lucene's Query model. I recently realized that my implementation of OR NOT was not working as I would expect and I was wondering if anyone on this list

Re: What is the difference between these searches?

2004-11-09 Thread Luke Francl
On Tue, 2004-11-09 at 15:48, Erik Hatcher wrote: This last query has a required clause, which is what BooleanQuery requires when there is a NOT clause. You're getting what you want here because you've got an item_type:xyz clause as required. In your first example, you're requiring

Re: What is the difference between these searches?

2004-11-09 Thread Luke Francl
On Tue, 2004-11-09 at 16:00, Paul Elschot wrote: Lucene has no provision for matching by being prohibited only. This can be achieved by indexing something for each document that can be used in queries to match always, combined with something prohibited in a query. But doing this is bad for

Re: can lucene be backed to have an update field

2004-11-09 Thread Paul Elschot
Chris, On Tuesday 09 November 2004 22:54, Chris Fraschetti wrote: Is it possible to modify the lucene source to create an updateDocument(doc#, FIELD, value) function ? It's possible, but an implementation would not be efficient when the field is indexed. The current index structure has

Re: What is the difference between these searches?

2004-11-09 Thread Paul Elschot
On Tuesday 09 November 2004 23:14, Luke Francl wrote: On Tue, 2004-11-09 at 16:00, Paul Elschot wrote: Lucene has no provision for matching by being prohibited only. This can be achieved by indexing something for each document that can be used in queries to match always, combined with

Re: Lucene external field storage contribution.

2004-11-09 Thread Terry Steichen
Kevin, Sorry for the delay in replying. I think your idea for an external field storage mechanism is excellent. I'd love to see it, and if I can, will be willing to help make that happen. Regards, Terry - Original Message - From: Kevin A. Burton To: Lucene Users List

LUCENE + DATA RETRIVAL

2004-11-09 Thread Karthik N S
Hi guys, Apologies... Has any one on the form attempted to retrieved data and Indexed Macromedia FLASH based Files If there is some example please distrubute ,it may be usefull for developer's. Thx in advance WITH WARM REGARDS HAVE A NICE DAY [

Lucene1.4.1 + OutOf Memory

2004-11-09 Thread Karthik N S
Hi Guys Apologies.. History Ist type : 4 subindexes + MultiSearcher + Search on Content Field Only for 2000 hits = Exception [ Too many Files Open ] IInd type : 40 Mergerd Indexes [1000

Re: Lucene1.4.1 + OutOf Memory

2004-11-09 Thread yahootintin-lucene
There is a memory leak in the sorting code of Lucene 1.4.1. 1.4.2 has the fix! --- Karthik N S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Guys Apologies.. History Ist type : 4 subindexes + MultiSearcher + Search on Content Field Only for 2000 hits

Re: Locking issue

2004-11-09 Thread yahootintin . 1247688
Otis or Erik, do you know if a Reader continously opening should cause the Writer to fail with a Lock obtain timed out error? --- Lucene Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The attached Java file shows a locking issue that occurs with Lucene. One thread opens and closes an IndexReader.