problem restoring index

2004-12-08 Thread Santosh
hi,

when I restart the tomcat . the Index is getting corrupted. If I take the 
backup of Index and then restarting tomcat. the Index is not working properly. 

Do I have to Index again all the documents whenever I restart the Tomcat?




---SOFTPRO DISCLAIMER--



Information contained in this E-MAIL and any attachments are

confidential being  proprietary to SOFTPRO SYSTEMS  is 'privileged'

and 'confidential'.



If you are not an intended or authorised recipient of this E-MAIL or

have received it in error, You are notified that any use, copying or

dissemination  of the information contained in this E-MAIL in any

manner whatsoever is strictly prohibited. Please delete it immediately

and notify the sender by E-MAIL.



In such a case reading, reproducing, printing or further dissemination

of this E-MAIL is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.



SOFTPRO SYSYTEMS does not REPRESENT or WARRANT that an attachment

hereto is free from computer viruses or other defects.



The opinions expressed in this E-MAIL and any ATTACHEMENTS may be

those of the author and are not necessarily those of SOFTPRO SYSTEMS.





Help to remove document

2004-12-08 Thread Alex Kiselevski

Hello,
Help me pls, I want to know how to remove document from index

Alex Kiselevsky
 Speech Technology  Tel:972-9-776-43-46
RD, Amdocs - IsraelMobile: 972-53-63 50 38
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]




The information contained in this message is proprietary of Amdocs,
protected from disclosure, and may be privileged.
The information is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s)
of the message. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, use, distribution or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately
by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.
Thank you.

Re: problem restoring index

2004-12-08 Thread Otis Gospodnetic
There is no need to reindex.  However, I also don't quite get what the
problem is :)

Otis

--- Santosh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 hi,
 
 when I restart the tomcat . the Index is getting corrupted. If I take
 the backup of Index and then restarting tomcat. the Index is not
 working properly. 
 
 Do I have to Index again all the documents whenever I restart the
 Tomcat?
 
 
 
 
 ---SOFTPRO
 DISCLAIMER--
 
 Information contained in this E-MAIL and any attachments are
 confidential being  proprietary to SOFTPRO SYSTEMS  is 'privileged'
 and 'confidential'.
 
 If you are not an intended or authorised recipient of this E-MAIL or
 have received it in error, You are notified that any use, copying or
 dissemination  of the information contained in this E-MAIL in any
 manner whatsoever is strictly prohibited. Please delete it
 immediately
 and notify the sender by E-MAIL.
 
 In such a case reading, reproducing, printing or further
 dissemination
 of this E-MAIL is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
 
 SOFTPRO SYSYTEMS does not REPRESENT or WARRANT that an attachment
 hereto is free from computer viruses or other defects.
 
 The opinions expressed in this E-MAIL and any ATTACHEMENTS may be
 those of the author and are not necessarily those of SOFTPRO SYSTEMS.


 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: searchig with special characters

2004-12-08 Thread Otis Gospodnetic
Leading wildcard character (*) is not allowed if you use QueryParser
that comes with Lucene.  Reason: performance.  See many discussions
about this on lucene-user mailing list.  Also see the search sytax
document on the Lucene site.  What other characters are you having
trouble with?

Otis


--- Santosh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 whenever I search with some special chracters like  *world   I am
 getting exception . how can I avoid this? and for what other
 characters lucene give this type of exceptions?
 
 
 ---SOFTPRO
 DISCLAIMER--
 
 Information contained in this E-MAIL and any attachments are
 confidential being  proprietary to SOFTPRO SYSTEMS  is 'privileged'
 and 'confidential'.
 
 If you are not an intended or authorised recipient of this E-MAIL or
 have received it in error, You are notified that any use, copying or
 dissemination  of the information contained in this E-MAIL in any
 manner whatsoever is strictly prohibited. Please delete it
 immediately
 and notify the sender by E-MAIL.
 
 In such a case reading, reproducing, printing or further
 dissemination
 of this E-MAIL is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
 
 SOFTPRO SYSYTEMS does not REPRESENT or WARRANT that an attachment
 hereto is free from computer viruses or other defects.
 
 The opinions expressed in this E-MAIL and any ATTACHEMENTS may be
 those of the author and are not necessarily those of SOFTPRO SYSTEMS.


 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Empty/non-empty field indexing question

2004-12-08 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Otis
What kind of implications does that produce on the search?
If I understand correctly that record would not be searched for if the 
field is not there, correct?
But then is there a point putting an empty value in it, if an 
application will never search for empty values?

thanks
-pedja
Otis Gospodnetic said the following on 12/8/2004 1:31 AM:
Empty fields won't add any value, you can skip them.  Documents in an
index don't have to be uniform.  Each Document could have a different
set of fields.  Of course, that has some obvious implications for
search, but is perfectly fine technically.
Otis
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 

Here's probably a silly question, very newbish, but I had to ask.
Since I have mysql documents that contain over 30 fields each and
most of them
are added to the index, is it a common practice to add fields to the
index with 
empty values, for that perticular record, or should the field be
totally omitted.

What I mean is if let's say a Title field is empty on a specific
record (in mysql)
should I still add that field into Lucene index with an empty value
or just
skip it and only add the fields that contain non-empty values?
thanks
-pedja

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 



Re: Empty/non-empty field indexing question

2004-12-08 Thread Otis Gospodnetic
Correct.
No, there is no point in putting an empty field there.

Otis

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Hi Otis
 
 What kind of implications does that produce on the search?
 
 If I understand correctly that record would not be searched for if
 the 
 field is not there, correct?
 But then is there a point putting an empty value in it, if an 
 application will never search for empty values?
 
 
 thanks
 
 -pedja
 
 
 Otis Gospodnetic said the following on 12/8/2004 1:31 AM:
 
 Empty fields won't add any value, you can skip them.  Documents in
 an
 index don't have to be uniform.  Each Document could have a
 different
 set of fields.  Of course, that has some obvious implications for
 search, but is perfectly fine technically.
 
 Otis
 
 --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
   
 
 Here's probably a silly question, very newbish, but I had to ask.
 Since I have mysql documents that contain over 30 fields each and
 most of them
 are added to the index, is it a common practice to add fields to
 the
 index with 
 empty values, for that perticular record, or should the field be
 totally omitted.
 
 What I mean is if let's say a Title field is empty on a specific
 record (in mysql)
 should I still add that field into Lucene index with an empty value
 or just
 skip it and only add the fields that contain non-empty values?
 
 thanks
 
 -pedja
 
 
 
 

-
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail:
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 
 
 
 

-
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 
   
 
 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Does Lucene support the XOR operator?

2004-12-08 Thread jjkarm
Does Lucene support the XOR operator?



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Lucene Vs Ixiasoft

2004-12-08 Thread Praveen Peddi
Does anyone know about Ixiasoft server. Its a xml repository/search engine. If 
anyone knows about it, does he/she also know how it is compared to Lucene? 
Which is fast? 

Praveen
** 
Praveen Peddi
Sr Software Engg, Context Media, Inc. 
email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Tel:  401.854.3475 
Fax:  401.861.3596 
web: http://www.contextmedia.com 
** 
Context Media- The Leader in Enterprise Content Integration 


Re: 'IN' type search

2004-12-08 Thread Otis Gospodnetic
Hello,

You can use BooleanQuery for that.

Otis

--- Ravi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  
 Hi
  How do you get all documents in lucene where a particular field
 value
 is in a given list of values (like SQL IN). What kind of Query class
 should I use?
 
 Thanks in advance.
 Ravi.
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Does Lucene support the XOR operator?

2004-12-08 Thread Erik Hatcher
On Dec 8, 2004, at 2:05 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does Lucene support the XOR operator?
XOR is not a built-in operation.  However in a few lines of code (a 
custom subclass of BooleanQuery) I was able to implement it.  I built 
this functionality under contract and I'm still working out the details 
of how much of my work can be contributed back, most of which is custom 
and isn't generalizable, but some like an XOR query is general purpose 
enough.

However, I will give some hints - all the details of providing a custom 
Similarity has been been mentioned in this list - thats the trick.

Erik
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


RE: Index delete failing

2004-12-08 Thread Ravi
I got this working. I had to close all index searchers and writer on the
index, set them to null and call System.gc() before the delete process.
I think windows still thinks writer and searchers are pointing to the
index directory even if you close them. 

Ravi

-Original Message-
From: Otis Gospodnetic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 4:48 PM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Index delete failing

This smells like a Windows issue.  It is possible that something in your
JVM is still holding onto the index directory (for example,
FSDirectory), and Winblows is not letting you remove the directory.  I
bet this will work if you exit the JVM and run java.io.file.delete()
without calling Lucene.  Sorry, my Windows + Lucene experience is
limited.

Otis

--- Ravi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Hi
  We need to delete a lucene index from our application using 
 java.io.file.delete(). We are closing the indexWriter and even all the

 index searchers on that folder. But a call to delete returns false.
 There is no lock on the index directory. Interesting thing is that the

 deletable and segments files are getting removed. But the rest of the 
 .cfs are not. Has somebody had similar problem?
 
 Thanks in advance,
 Ravi. 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: Sorting in Lucene

2004-12-08 Thread Ramon Aseniero
Hi Erik,

I am not getting any error. 

Yes I am indexing multiple keyword fields by the same name in a single
document. Does that works with Lucene?

Thanks,
Ramon

-Original Message-
From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 5:13 PM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Sorting in Lucene

Ramon,

More details would be most helpful in being able to assist.  You said 
you cannot sort - but you did not tell us what error you're getting.  
Are you indexing multiple keyword fields by the same name for a single 
document?

As for searching - depending on the type of text you're searching for, 
the analyzer may be making it difficult/impossible to search for.  
QueryParser doesn't know about keyword fields.

Erik

On Dec 7, 2004, at 7:13 PM, Ramon Aseniero wrote:

 Hi Chuck,

 Yes I tried to search with the exact string stored on the index but I 
 don't
 get a match. I tried the search using LIMO and LUKE.

 It seems like untokenized field are not searchable.

 Thanks,
 Ramon

 -Original Message-
 From: Chuck Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 4:04 PM
 To: Lucene Users List
 Subject: RE: Sorting in Lucene

 Since it's untokenized, are you searching with the exact string stored
 in the field?

 Chuck

 -Original Message-
 From: Ramon Aseniero [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 3:29 PM
 To: 'Lucene Users List'; 'Chris Fraschetti'
 Subject: RE: Sorting in Lucene

 I also tried searching the said field on LIMO and I don't get a
 match.

 Thanks,
 Ramon

 -Original Message-
 From: Ramon Aseniero [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 3:20 PM
 To: 'Lucene Users List'; 'Chris Fraschetti'
 Subject: RE: Sorting in Lucene

 Hi,

 I use LIMO to look into my index. Limo tells me that the field is
 untokenized but is indexed.

 Is it possible to search on untokenized field?

 Thanks,
 Ramon

 -Original Message-
 From: Chris Fraschetti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 3:14 PM
 To: Lucene Users List
 Subject: Re: Sorting in Lucene

 I would try 'luke' to look at your index and use it's search
 functionality to make sure it's now your code that is the problem,
 as
 well as to ensure  your document is appearing in the index as you
 intend it. It's been a lifesaver for me.

 http://www.getopt.org/luke/


 On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 15:02:26 -0800, Ramon Aseniero
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi All,

 Any idea why a Keyword field is not searchable? On my index I have
 a
 field
 of type Keyword but I could not somehow search on the field.

 Thanks in advance.

 Ramon

 --
 No virus found in this outgoing message.
 Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
 Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.7 - Release Date:
 12/7/2004




 --
 ___
 Chris Fraschetti
 e [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



 --
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
 Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.7 - Release Date: 12/7/2004


 --
 No virus found in this outgoing message.
 Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
 Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.7 - Release Date: 12/7/2004




 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



 --
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
 Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.7 - Release Date: 12/7/2004


 --
 No virus found in this outgoing message.
 Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
 Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.7 - Release Date: 12/7/2004




 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



 -- 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
 Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.7 - Release Date: 12/7/2004


 -- 
 No virus found in this outgoing message.
 Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
 Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.7 - Release Date: 12/7/2004



 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.7 - Release Date: 12/7/2004
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.

partial updating of lucene

2004-12-08 Thread Praveen Peddi
Hi all,
I have a question about updating the lucene document. I know that there is no 
API to do that now. So this is what I am doing in order to update the document 
with the field title.

1) Get the document from lucene index
2) Remove a field called title and add the same field with a modified value
3) Remove the docment (based on one of our field) using Reader and then close 
the Reader.
4) Add the document that is obtained in 1 and modified in 2.

I am not sure if this is the right way of doing it but I am having problems 
searching for that document after updating it. The problem is only with the un 
stored fields.

For example, I search as description:boy where description is a unstored, 
indexed, tokenized field in the document. I find 1 document. Now I update the 
document the document's title as descripbed above and repeat the same search 
description:boy and now I don't find any results. I have not touched the 
field description at all. I just updated the field title.

Is this an expected behaviour? If not, is it a bug.

If I change the field description as stored, indexed and tokenized, the search 
works fine before and after updating.

Praveen
** 
Praveen Peddi
Sr Software Engg, Context Media, Inc. 
email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Tel:  401.854.3475 
Fax:  401.861.3596 
web: http://www.contextmedia.com 
** 
Context Media- The Leader in Enterprise Content Integration 


Re: partial updating of lucene

2004-12-08 Thread Justin Swanhart
You unstored fields were not stored in the index, only their terms
were stored.  When you get the document from the index and modify it,
those terms are lost when you add the document again.

You can either simply create a new document and populate all the
fields and add that document to the index, or you can add the unstored
fields to the document retrieved in step 1.


On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:53:26 -0500, Praveen Peddi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi all,
 I have a question about updating the lucene document. I know that there is no 
 API to do that now. So this is what I am doing in order to update the 
 document with the field title.
 
 1) Get the document from lucene index
 2) Remove a field called title and add the same field with a modified value
 3) Remove the docment (based on one of our field) using Reader and then close 
 the Reader.
 4) Add the document that is obtained in 1 and modified in 2.
 
 I am not sure if this is the right way of doing it but I am having problems 
 searching for that document after updating it. The problem is only with the 
 un stored fields.
 
 For example, I search as description:boy where description is a unstored, 
 indexed, tokenized field in the document. I find 1 document. Now I update the 
 document the document's title as descripbed above and repeat the same search 
 description:boy and now I don't find any results. I have not touched the 
 field description at all. I just updated the field title.
 
 Is this an expected behaviour? If not, is it a bug.
 
 If I change the field description as stored, indexed and tokenized, the 
 search works fine before and after updating.
 
 Praveen
 **
 Praveen Peddi
 Sr Software Engg, Context Media, Inc.
 email:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Tel:  401.854.3475
 Fax:  401.861.3596
 web: http://www.contextmedia.com
 **
 Context Media- The Leader in Enterprise Content Integration
 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Lucene Vs Ixiasoft

2004-12-08 Thread Nicolas Maisonneuve
hi,
think first of the relevance of the model in this 2 search engine  for
XML document retrieval.

Lucene is classic fulltext search engine  using the vector space
model. this model is efficient for indexing  no structred document
(like plain text file ) and not made for structured document like XML.
there is a XML demo of lucene sandbox but it's not really very
efficient because it doesn't take advantage of  the document strucutre
in the indexing and the ranking model, so it lose semantic information
and relevance.

i don't know Ixiasoft, check the information to see how it index and
rank XML document.

nicolas 

On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 14:20:45 -0500, Praveen Peddi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Does anyone know about Ixiasoft server. Its a xml repository/search engine. 
 If anyone knows about it, does he/she also know how it is compared to Lucene? 
 Which is fast?
 
 Praveen
 **
 Praveen Peddi
 Sr Software Engg, Context Media, Inc.
 email:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Tel:  401.854.3475
 Fax:  401.861.3596
 web: http://www.contextmedia.com
 **
 Context Media- The Leader in Enterprise Content Integration
 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Unexpected TermEnum behavior

2004-12-08 Thread Alexey Lef
My application needs to enumerate all terms for a specific field. To do that
I get the TermEnum using the following code:

TermEnum terms = reader.terms(new Term(fieldName, ));

I noticed that initially TermEnum is positioned at the first term. In other
words, I don't have to call terms.next() before calling terms.term(). This
is different from the behavior of Iterator,  Enumeration and ResultSet whose
initial position is before the first result. I wonder whether it is this way
by design.

If it is by design, what is the defined TermEnum behavior if there are no
terms for the field name in question? Will the call to terms.term() return
null? Or get positioned at the first term with the field name that comes
after the provided field name? What if there are no field names after it?

In any case, some javadoc describing the behavior would be extremely useful.
Being used to Iterators and ResultSets, I automatically wrote the code the
same way, calling next() first. Fortunately, I had a field with only 2
terms, that's why I noticed that I am missing the first element.

Thanks,

Alexey


Re: Unexpected TermEnum behavior

2004-12-08 Thread Chris Hostetter
:   TermEnum terms = reader.terms(new Term(fieldName, ));
:
: I noticed that initially TermEnum is positioned at the first term. In other
: words, I don't have to call terms.next() before calling terms.term(). This
: is different from the behavior of Iterator,  Enumeration and ResultSet whose

Well, strictly speeking it's very different -- in particular, the next
method doesn't return the item, which is also very different from
Iterators and Enumeration.

I agree it's a little confusing, esecially since TermDocs and TermEnum are
different.

: If it is by design, what is the defined TermEnum behavior if there are no
: terms for the field name in question? Will the call to terms.term() return
: null? Or get positioned at the first term with the field name that comes
: after the provided field name? What if there are no field names after it?

I believe that in those cases, the TermEnum object itself will be null.

: In any case, some javadoc describing the behavior would be extremely useful.

I thought it was documented in the TermEnum interface, but looking at it
now I realize that not only does the TermEnum javadoc not explain it
very well, but the class FilteredTermEnum (which implements TermEnum)
acctually documents the oposite behavior...

  public Term term()

  Returns the current Term in the enumeration. Initially
  invalid, valid  after next() called for the first time.


-Hoss


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: problem restoring index

2004-12-08 Thread Satoshi Hasegawa
   You cannot use a wild character as the first character of the search.
   http://jakarta.apache.org/lucene/docs/queryparsersyntax.html
- Original Message - 
From: Santosh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Lucene Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 6:21 PM
Subject: problem restoring index

hi,
when I restart the tomcat . the Index is getting corrupted. If I take the 
backup of Index and then restarting tomcat. the Index is not working 
properly.

Do I have to Index again all the documents whenever I restart the Tomcat?

---SOFTPRO DISCLAIMER--
Information contained in this E-MAIL and any attachments are
confidential being  proprietary to SOFTPRO SYSTEMS  is 'privileged'
and 'confidential'.
If you are not an intended or authorised recipient of this E-MAIL or
have received it in error, You are notified that any use, copying or
dissemination  of the information contained in this E-MAIL in any
manner whatsoever is strictly prohibited. Please delete it immediately
and notify the sender by E-MAIL.
In such a case reading, reproducing, printing or further dissemination
of this E-MAIL is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
SOFTPRO SYSYTEMS does not REPRESENT or WARRANT that an attachment
hereto is free from computer viruses or other defects.
The opinions expressed in this E-MAIL and any ATTACHEMENTS may be
those of the author and are not necessarily those of SOFTPRO SYSTEMS.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: searchig with special characters

2004-12-08 Thread Satoshi Hasegawa
   You cannot use a wild character as the first character of the search.
   http://jakarta.apache.org/lucene/docs/queryparsersyntax.html
- Original Message - 
From: Santosh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Lucene Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 6:24 PM
Subject: searchig with special characters

whenever I search with some special chracters like  *world   I am getting 
exception . how can I avoid this? and for what other characters lucene give 
this type of exceptions?

---SOFTPRO DISCLAIMER--
Information contained in this E-MAIL and any attachments are
confidential being  proprietary to SOFTPRO SYSTEMS  is 'privileged'
and 'confidential'.
If you are not an intended or authorised recipient of this E-MAIL or
have received it in error, You are notified that any use, copying or
dissemination  of the information contained in this E-MAIL in any
manner whatsoever is strictly prohibited. Please delete it immediately
and notify the sender by E-MAIL.
In such a case reading, reproducing, printing or further dissemination
of this E-MAIL is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
SOFTPRO SYSYTEMS does not REPRESENT or WARRANT that an attachment
hereto is free from computer viruses or other defects.
The opinions expressed in this E-MAIL and any ATTACHEMENTS may be
those of the author and are not necessarily those of SOFTPRO SYSTEMS.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: java.io.FileNotFoundException: ... (No such file or directory)

2004-12-08 Thread Doug Cutting
Justin Swanhart wrote:
The indexes are located on a NFS mountpoint. Could this be the
problem?
Yes.  Lucene's lock mechanism is designed to keep this from happening, 
but the sort of lock files that FSDirectory uses are known to be broken 
with NFS.

Doug
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Sorting in Lucene

2004-12-08 Thread Erik Hatcher
On Dec 8, 2004, at 5:02 PM, Ramon Aseniero wrote:
Yes I am indexing multiple keyword fields by the same name in a single
document. Does that works with Lucene?
No - logically it doesn't make sense.  How would Lucene determine which 
of those field values to sort by?

You need a single field value to sort by.  I think you should get an 
error when sorting by a field with duplicate values though.

Again, it would be most helpful if you could provide code that 
demonstrates what you're doing during indexing and searching 
specifically related to the sorting issue.

Erik
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: Lucene Vs Ixiasoft

2004-12-08 Thread John Wang
I thought Lucene implements the Boolean model.

-John


On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 00:19:21 +0100, Nicolas Maisonneuve
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 hi,
 think first of the relevance of the model in this 2 search engine  for
 XML document retrieval.
 
 Lucene is classic fulltext search engine  using the vector space
 model. this model is efficient for indexing  no structred document
 (like plain text file ) and not made for structured document like XML.
 there is a XML demo of lucene sandbox but it's not really very
 efficient because it doesn't take advantage of  the document strucutre
 in the indexing and the ranking model, so it lose semantic information
 and relevance.
 
 i don't know Ixiasoft, check the information to see how it index and
 rank XML document.
 
 nicolas
 
 On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 14:20:45 -0500, Praveen Peddi
 
 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Does anyone know about Ixiasoft server. Its a xml repository/search engine. 
  If anyone knows about it, does he/she also know how it is compared to 
  Lucene? Which is fast?
 
  Praveen
  **
  Praveen Peddi
  Sr Software Engg, Context Media, Inc.
  email:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Tel:  401.854.3475
  Fax:  401.861.3596
  web: http://www.contextmedia.com
  **
  Context Media- The Leader in Enterprise Content Integration
 
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: Lucene Vs Ixiasoft

2004-12-08 Thread Chuck Williams
Lucene contains a complete set of Boolean query operators, and it uses
the vector space model to determine scores for relevance ranking.  It's
fast.  It works.

Chuck

   -Original Message-
   From: John Wang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2004 7:13 PM
   To: Lucene Users List; Nicolas Maisonneuve
   Subject: Re: Lucene Vs Ixiasoft
   
   I thought Lucene implements the Boolean model.
   
   -John
   
   
   On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 00:19:21 +0100, Nicolas Maisonneuve
   [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi,
think first of the relevance of the model in this 2 search engine
for
XML document retrieval.
   
Lucene is classic fulltext search engine  using the vector space
model. this model is efficient for indexing  no structred document
(like plain text file ) and not made for structured document like
XML.
there is a XML demo of lucene sandbox but it's not really very
efficient because it doesn't take advantage of  the document
strucutre
in the indexing and the ranking model, so it lose semantic
information
and relevance.
   
i don't know Ixiasoft, check the information to see how it index
and
rank XML document.
   
nicolas
   
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 14:20:45 -0500, Praveen Peddi
   
   
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Does anyone know about Ixiasoft server. Its a xml
repository/search
   engine. If anyone knows about it, does he/she also know how it is
   compared to Lucene? Which is fast?

 Praveen
 **
 Praveen Peddi
 Sr Software Engg, Context Media, Inc.
 email:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Tel:  401.854.3475
 Fax:  401.861.3596
 web: http://www.contextmedia.com
 **
 Context Media- The Leader in Enterprise Content Integration


   
   
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   
   
   
  
-
   To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Conditional Operator in Lucene

2004-12-08 Thread Ramon Aseniero
Hi All,

 

Does Lucene support conditional operator? Like retrieve all documents where
age is greater than 21, how do I compose a query like this in Lucene is
there a different Query object to use?

 

Thanks,

Ramon


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.7 - Release Date: 12/7/2004
 


Re: Unexpected TermEnum behavior

2004-12-08 Thread Morus Walter
Chris Hostetter writes:
 
 I thought it was documented in the TermEnum interface, but looking at it
 now I realize that not only does the TermEnum javadoc not explain it
 very well, but the class FilteredTermEnum (which implements TermEnum)
 acctually documents the oposite behavior...
 
   public Term term()
 
   Returns the current Term in the enumeration. Initially
   invalid, valid  after next() called for the first time.
 
That's a documentation bug. Fixed in CVS.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32353

Morus

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



SEARCH +HITS+LIMIT

2004-12-08 Thread Karthik N S
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 Fields of Type 'Text' )

2) On search for a simple words  Camera  returns me  6000 hits.

3) Since the Search process is  via  WebApps , a simple JSP is used to
display the Content.


Question

How to Display the Contents for the Hits in  Incremental order ?

[ Each Time a re hit to the Mergerindex with Incremental X value ].
This would solve the problem of Out of Memory by prefetching all the hit in
one strait go process.

Ex:

Total hits 6000

1st page  -  hit's returned (1   to   25)
2nd page -  hit's returned (26  to  50)
.
.
.
.

N th page  hit's returned ( 5975 - 6000 )

Hint : - This is similar to a SQL query   SELECT * FROM LUCENE  LIMIT 10, 5



  WITH WARM REGARDS
  HAVE A NICE DAY
  [ N.S.KARTHIK]




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]