On Friday 10 December 2004 07:10, Steve Skillcorn wrote:
Hi;
I'm currently using Lucene (which I am extremely impressed with BTW) to
index a knowledge base of documents. One issue I have is that only certain
documents are available to certain users (or groups). The number of
documents is
The Lucene in Action e-book is now available at Manning's site:
http://www.manning.com/hatcher2
Manning also put lots of other goodies there, the table of contents,
about this book, preface, the foreward from Doug Cutting himself
(thanks Doug!!!), and a couple of sample chapters. The
Hi Steve,
Possibly the easiest way to handle this is to tag the
documents with a field listing the permitted
roles/groups (not the individual users).
I would be tempted to keep the information that
associates users to groups outside of the Lucene index
eg in a relational DB.
This way you do not
Hi guys
Apologies.
I am still in delima on How to use the HitCollector for returning Hits hits
between scores 0.2f to 1.0f ,
There is not a simple example for the same, yet lot's of talk on usage for
the same on the form.
Please somebody spare a bit of code (u'r intelligence)
Am I the first one who bought the Lucene in Action book ?
Thanks Erik and Otis.
William W. Silva
From: Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Lucene Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Lucene User [EMAIL PROTECTED],Lucene List
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Lucene in Action e-book now available!
On Dec 10, 2004, at 7:39 AM, Karthik N S wrote:
I am still in delima on How to use the HitCollector for returning
Hits hits
between scores 0.2f to 1.0f ,
There is not a simple example for the same, yet lot's of talk on usage
for
the same on the form.
Unfortunately there isn't a clean way to
On Dec 10, 2004, at 8:24 AM, Andraz Skoric wrote:
Displaytag (http://displaytag.sourceforge.net/) is for displaying
search results in multiple pages
I don't know displaytag internals, but be cautious with such things.
What you do not want to happen is all the results to be grabbed and
cached
Nice Work!
Congratulations Guys.
- Original Message -
From: Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Lucene User [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lucene List
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 3:52 AM
Subject: Lucene in Action e-book now available!
The Lucene in Action e-book is now
Congrats !
i went through sample chapter 1 . well written .
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 09:58:25 -0500, Luke Shannon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nice Work!
Congratulations Guys.
- Original Message -
From: Erik Hatcher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Lucene User [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Lucene List
You probably need to increase the amount of RAM available to your JVM.
See the parameters:
-Xmx :Maximum memory usable by the JVM
-Xms :Initial memory allocated to JVM
My params are; -Xmx2048m -Xms128m (2G max, 128M initial)
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:17:29 -0600, Sildy Augustine
[EMAIL
I am not sure. But guess there are three possilities,
(1). see that you use
Field.Text(contents, stringBuffer.toString())
This will store all your string of text into document object.
And it might be long ...
I do not know the detail how Lucene implemented.
I think you can try use unstored
I read that the tokenised fields cannot be sorted. In order to sort tokenized
field, either the application has to duplicate field with diff name and not
tokenize it or come up with something else. But shouldn't the search engine
takecare of this? Are there any plans of putting this
On Dec 10, 2004, at 1:40 PM, Praveen Peddi wrote:
I read that the tokenised fields cannot be sorted. In order to sort
tokenized field, either the application has to duplicate field with
diff name and not tokenize it or come up with something else. But
shouldn't the search engine takecare of
I was only thinking in terms of other search engines. I worked with other
search engines and I didn't see this requirements before. I think you are
right that its wasteful to duplicate all tokenized fields. Not sure if there
is a smart of dealing with it.
Praveen
- Original Message -
Great!!! It works perfect after I setup -Xms and -Xmx JVM command-line
parameters with:
java -Xms128m -Xmx128m
It turns out that my JVM is running out of memory. And Otis is right on
my
reader closing too.
reader.close() will close the reader and release any system resources
associated with
How do I get the number of docs in an index If I just have access to a
searcher on that index?
Thanks in advance
Ravi.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
numDocs()
http://jakarta.apache.org/lucene/docs/api/org/apache/lucene/index/IndexReader.html#numDocs()
Ravi said the following on 12/10/2004 2:42 PM:
How do I get the number of docs in an index If I just have access to a
searcher on that index?
Thanks in advance
Ravi.
If your index is open shouldnt there be an instance of IndexReader
already there?
Ravi said the following on 12/10/2004 3:13 PM:
I already have a field with a constant value in my index. How about
using IndexSearcher.docFreq(new Term(field,value))? Then I don't have to
instantiate IndexReader.
I'm fairly new to lucene. The main reason why I did n't use the
IndexReader constructor for the searcher is we organize the indexes as
different partitions depending on document's date and during searching I
instantiate a MultiSearcher object on these different partitions
depending on from-date
Since I am not aware of the lucene code much, I couldn't make much out of
your patch. But is this patch already tested and proved to be efficient? If
so, why can't it be merge into the lucene code and made it part of the
release. I think the bug is valid. Its very likely that people want to
Hello,
I'd like some suggestions on the following scenario.
Say I have an index with a stored, indexed field called
'weight'(essentially an int stored as string). I'd like to sort in
descending order of final weight, the search results by performing a
calculation involving the lucene score
Congratulations on the book. I ordered my copy the other day via
regular post and am eagerly awaiting it. It looks like it will make
lucene available to a much wider audience.
Based on the table of contents, I wanted to toss out a couple of ideas
for your next book or articles.
1. I didn't see
Thanks Otis for your response and compliments (wish I was a lucene guru
like you guys :-)
I believe you are talking about the boost factor for fields or documents
while searching. That does not apply in my case - maybe I am missing a
point here.
The weight field I was talking about is only for
Hi,
I am going to implement a search service and plan to use Lucene. Is
there any simple query language that is independent of any particular
search engine out there?
Thanks
Dongling
If you have received
You could support only terms with no operators at all, which will work
in most search engines (except those that require combining operators).
Using just terms and phrases embedded in 's is pretty universal.
After that, you might want to add +/- required/prohibited restrictions,
which many engines
Very cool, thanks for posting this!
Google's feature doesn't seem to do a search on every keystroke
necessarily. Instead, it waits until you haven't typed a character
for a short period (I'm guessing about 100 or 150 milliseconds). So
if you type fast, it doesn't hit the server until you
: I believe you are talking about the boost factor for fields or documents
: while searching. That does not apply in my case - maybe I am missing a
: point here.
: The weight field I was talking about is only for the calculation
Otis is suggesting that you set the boost of the document to be your
Displaytag (http://displaytag.sourceforge.net/) is for displaying search
results in multiple pages
lp, a
Karthik N S wrote:
Hi Guy's
Apologies...
One question for the form [ Especially Erik]
1) I have a MERGED Index with 100,000 File Indexed into it ( Content is
one of the
I think you should close your files in a finally clause in case of
exceptions with file system and also print out the exception.
You could be running out of file handles.
-Original Message-
From: Jin, Ying [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 11:15 AM
To: [EMAIL
Hi, Everyone,
We're trying to index ~1500 archives but get OutOfMemoryError about
halfway through the index process. I've tried to run program under two
different Redhat Linux servers: One with 256M memory and 365M swap
space. The other one with 512M memory and 1G swap space. However, both
got
Ying,
You should follow this finally block advice below. In addition, I
think you can just close the reader, and it will close the underlying
stream (I'm not sure about that, double-check it).
You are not running out of file handles, though. Your JVM is running
out of memory. You can play
Ok, I see. Seems most ppl think is the third possiblity
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Xiangyu Jin wrote:
I am not sure. But guess there are three possilities,
(1). see that you use
Field.Text(contents, stringBuffer.toString())
This will store all your string of text into document object.
And it
I have suggested a solution for this problem (
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30382 ) you can use the
patch suggested there and recompile lucene.
Aviran
http://www.aviransplace.com
-Original Message-
From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December
If I close a MultiSearcher, does it close all the associated searchers
too? I was getting a bad file descriptor error, if I close the
MultiSearcher object and open it again for another search without
reinstantiating the underlying searchers.
Thanks in advance,
Ravi
On Dec 10, 2004, at 4:16 PM, Ravi wrote:
If I close a MultiSearcher, does it close all the associated searchers
too?
It sure does:
public void close() throws IOException {
for (int i = 0; i searchables.length; i++)
searchables[i].close();
}
I was getting a bad file descriptor
Google just came out with a page that gives you feedback as to how many
pages will match your query and variations on it:
http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=1hl=en
I had an unexposed experiment I had done with Lucene a few months ago
that this has inspired me to expose - it's not the same,
36 matches
Mail list logo
