Re: search question

Erik, They both use the StandardAnalyzer... however looking at the toString() makes everything clearer. In the case a string has the following email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED], it gets split like so: first.last domain.com However in 1.4 it does not get split. So now we just check to see if an

search question

Hi guys, We have an index with some fields containing email addresses. Doing a search for an email address with this format: [EMAIL PROTECTED], does not bring up any results with lucene 1.4. The query: Field1:[EMAIL PROTECTED] However it returns results with 1.2. Any ideas? Roy.

lock file paths

Hey guys, Quick question... is there a way to get the file paths to the lock files? Or do I have to modify the src? Currently I can't find any methods that will return a lock's file path. Roy. - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: demo HTML parser question

Hi Fred, We were originally attempting to use the demo html parser (Lucene 1.2), but as you know, its for a demo. I think its threaded to optimize on time, to allow the calling thread to grab the title or top message even though its not done parsing the entire html document. That's just a

compiling 1.4 source

Hi guys, So we started upgrading to 1.4 and we need to add some of our own custom code. After compiling with ant, I noticed that the 1.4 ant script builds a jar called lucene-1.5-rc1-dev.jar, not lucene-1.4-final.jar. I'm pretty sure I did not download the wrong source. Is this just a wrong

Hits.doc(x) and range queries

Hi guys! I've posted previously that Hits.doc(x) was taking a long time. Turns out it has to do with a date range in our query. We usually do date ranges like this: Date:[(lucene date field) - (lucene date field)] Sometimes the begin date is 0 which is what we get from

Re: Custom filter

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 20:01:36 -0400, Erik Hatcher wrote On Aug 20, 2004, at 6:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We're currently in lucene 1.2... haven't moved to 1.3 yet. Skip 1.3 and go straight to 1.4.1 :) Upgrade - why not? Well we have some MASSIVE indexes so updating needs to be

Custom filter

Hi guys! I was hoping someone here could help me out with a custom filter. We have an index of emails and do some searches on the text of an email message and also searches based on the email addresses in a To, From or CC. Since we also do searches on a bunch of emails, we created a custom

Re: addIndexes vs addDocument

Otis, Okay, got it... however we weren't creating new document objects... just grabbing a document through an IndexReader and calling addDocument on another index. Would that still work with unstored fields(well, its working for us since we don't have any unstored fields)? Thanks a lot! Roy.

addIndexes and optimize

Hey y'all again, Just wondering why the IndexWriter.addIndexes method calls optimize before and after it starts merging segments together. We would like to create an addIndexes method that doesn't optimize and call optimize on the IndexWriter later. Roy.

moving 1.2 index to 1.4

Hey guys, We have a couple of giant indexes that were done in lucene 1.2. We would like to move to lucene 1.4 at some point. We have heard that we would probably need to re-index our indexes to take advantage of certain new features/optimizations of lucene 1.3/1.4. We were wondering if it

RE: Stress/scalability testing Lucene

Ah, for some reason i thought none of the Lucene methods were thread safe, or is this only in the case of reading and writing at the same time? I thought I read this in the FAQ. Roy. -Original Message- From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 5:04

the order of fields in Document.fields()

Quick question about Document.fields(). Lucene provides you with a method to retrieve the value of a field or grab all fields as an Enumeration. It does not, however, allow you to grab all values of one field for a document, it will only return the last value added for that field. For

RE: the order of fields in Document.fields()

Shouldn't there be at least one method that returns an array of fields in the correct order? Roy. -Original Message- The order is preserved (or reversed actually), so it's not random. It's reverse of the order of the order in which the fields were added to the document. This would be

Deleting a document found in a search

I am just getting started with Lucene and I think I have a problem understanding some basic concepts. I am using two-part identifiers to uniquely identify a document in the index. So whenever I want to index a document, I first want to find and delete the old form. To find it, I intend to

Enumerating all Terms

Is there a way of getting a list of all Terms that have been indexed? I guess it would approximate a wildcard query of the form *:* if that were valid, and instead of returning matching documents, just returning the fields and values. -- Thanks, Adrian. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: Deleting a document found in a search

No, I mean HitDoc.id, the document number field stored in the HitDoc class. This number is needed when calling IndexReader.delete(int docnum) but it is not publicly accessible. -- Adrian At 06:32 09/10/2002 -0700, Otis Gospodnetic wrote: You mean d.get(Id); ? --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I