RE: CachedSearcher

> -Original Message- > From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 6:56 PM > To: Lucene Users List > Subject: Re: CachedSearcher > > > I would be very surprised > if finalizers for > the hundreds of files that Lucene might open in a session > would h

RE: CachedSearcher

> -Original Message- > From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 6:44 PM > To: Lucene Users List > Subject: Re: CachedSearcher > > > Kelvin Tan wrote: > > If the object has a close() method with public modifier, > isn't it a common > > idiom that cl

RE: contains

I also think it might work. Just for fun I tried a variation of it on a copy of the unix file /usr/dict/words. Indexing program reads each word and splits it up into substrings and stores the original and the substrings e.g. "beautiful" stored as Field.UnIndexed, substrings "beautiful eautiful a

Re: Escape woes

I think I have a workaround, but I'm not sure why it works (since it doesn't mesh with the docs about escaping special chars). In the examples below, I was using StandardAnalyzer. If I switch to using WhitespaceAnalyzer, then one of the examples that fails (in the note below) becomes: search s

Escape woes

Hello all. I'm having a problem with escaping Lucene characters, and I was wondering if anyone here could help. I've set up a Keyword field for my documents named "host". "host" can contain names like "ocrlprod" or "ny-dns-2". I'm pretty sure that I want it to be a Keyword (rather than Text),

Re: Lucene for OSX?

There's a framework in the older versions of WebObjects that has the C++ version of AIAT. This was written by the same author as Lucene, but while he was at Apple. thanks, rob http://www.robdecker.com/ http://www.planetside.com/ On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, petite_abeille wrote: > Hello, > > I was wa

Re: CachedSearcher

On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Doug Cutting wrote: > Hang Li wrote: > > Why there are so many final and package-protected methods? > > The package private stuff was motivated by Javadoc. When I wrote > Lucene I wanted the Javadoc to make it easy to use. Thus I did not > want the Javadoc cluttered with l

Re: CachedSearcher

On Monday, July 15, 2002, at 10:19 PM, Kelvin Tan wrote: >> FSDirectory closes files as they're GC'd, so you >> don't have to explicitly close the IndexReaders or Searchers. >> >> Doug >> > > hmmm...is this documented somewhere? I go through quite abit of trouble > just to close Searchers (beca

Re: CachedSearcher

Hang Li wrote: > Why there are so many final and package-protected methods? The package private stuff was motivated by Javadoc. When I wrote Lucene I wanted the Javadoc to make it easy to use. Thus I did not want the Javadoc cluttered with lots of methods that 99% of users did not need to kno

RE: CachedSearcher

Point taken. Indeed, these were general recommendations that may/may not have a strong impact on Lucene's specific use of finalization. My only specific performance claim is that there will be a negative impact of some degree using finalizers. Whether that impact is noticable or not will probab

Re: CachedSearcher

Scott Ganyo wrote: > I'd like to see the finalize() methods removed from Lucene entirely. In a > system with heavy load and lots of gc, using finalize() causes problems. > [ ... ] > External resources (i.e. file handles) are not released until the reader > is closed. And, as many have found, L

Re: CachedSearcher

Kelvin Tan wrote: > If the object has a close() method with public modifier, isn't it a common > idiom that client code needs to invoke close() explicitly? If there's no > real need to call close, maybe it can be changed to protected? Yes, that is a common idiom. In the case of Lucene's FSDire

RE: contains

Just to correct a few points: - The factor would be 2 * (average no of chars per word)/2 = (average no of chars per word). - One would probably create a set of 2 * (maximum number of chars per word) as Fields for a document. If this could work was actually my question... - Most important: my propo

Re: Lucene for OSX?

At 4:05 PM +0200 7/16/02, petite_abeille wrote: >>Apple Information Access Toolkit (AIAT) >>http://www.devworld.apple.com/dev/aiat/ > >Well, that's basically the first incarnation of Lucene :-) And in >fact I was thinking to use it. However it seems to be missing from >the latest osx... If you

RE: CachedSearcher

I'd like to see the finalize() methods removed from Lucene entirely. In a system with heavy load and lots of gc, using finalize() causes problems. To wit: 1) I was at a talk at JavaOne last year where the gc performance experts from Sun (the engineers actually writing the HotSpot gc) were givin

Re: Lucene for OSX?

On Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 04:04 , Brook, James wrote: > It looks like it's available for FTP download as an 'SDK' on this page > http://developer.apple.com/sdk/ > > I have no idea whether this is up-to-date or compatible with the latest > OS > X. Thanks. I will take a look into it. Cheers

RE: Lucene for OSX?

It looks like it's available for FTP download as an 'SDK' on this page http://developer.apple.com/sdk/ I have no idea whether this is up-to-date or compatible with the latest OS X. -Original Message- From: petite_abeille [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 16 July 2002 16:06 To: Lucene Use

Re: Lucene for OSX?

Hi James, On Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 03:52 , Brook, James wrote: > How about this? I think it's what they use for Sherlock. > > Apple Information Access Toolkit (AIAT) > http://www.devworld.apple.com/dev/aiat/ Well, that's basically the first incarnation of Lucene :-) And in fact I was thin

Re: CachedSearcher

Halácsy Péter wrote: > Hello! > A lot of people requested a code to cache opened Searcher objects until the index is >not modified. The first version of this was writed by Scott Ganyo and submitted as >IndexAccessControl to the list. > > Now I've decoupled the logic that is needed to manage sea

RE: Lucene for OSX?

Hi PA, How about this? I think it's what they use for Sherlock. Apple Information Access Toolkit (AIAT) http://www.devworld.apple.com/dev/aiat/ I have an Objective C WebObjects 4.5 application running on Mac OS X Server 1.2 that uses it to directly search the blobs of an OpenBase database. I b

Re: Lucene for OSX?

On Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 03:46 , Chris van Mels wrote: > Java is an integral component of the OS X system - I haven't had any > trouble > running current versions of Lucene on it. Yes. I know. I could use the Java bridge to use Lucene as it is now. However, I would like to avoid the brid

Re: Lucene for OSX?

I don't have any experience with it, but I believe lextek stuff is not free. The author is very involved with text searching (wouldn't be surprised if he were on Lucene list(s)), just look him up. Maybe you can judge the software on that. Otis --- petite_abeille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >

RE: Lucene for OSX?

Java is an integral component of the OS X system - I haven't had any trouble running current versions of Lucene on it. - Chris > -- > From: Otis Gospodnetic[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Reply To: Lucene Users List > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 9:41 AM > To: Lucene Us

Re: Lucene for OSX?

On Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 03:41 , Otis Gospodnetic wrote: > The only thing that I can think of right now is omseek on sf.net, but > that project seems somewhat dead. I think that is in C or C++. Thanks. I also found something called Onix (http://www.lextek.com/onix/) Anybody have any exper

Re: Lucene for OSX?

The only thing that I can think of right now is omseek on sf.net, but that project seems somewhat dead. I think that is in C or C++. Otis --- petite_abeille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I was wandering if anybody knows of a Lucene port to straight C or > Objective C...?!? > > I nee

Lucene for OSX?

Hello, I was wandering if anybody knows of a Lucene port to straight C or Objective C...?!? I need something equivalent to Lucene (but native if possible) on Mac OS X... Thanks for any pointers!-) PA. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: