Thank You very much
--Tim
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Auftrag von Chris
Hostetter
Gesendet: Dienstag, 18. Januar 2005 04:56
An: Lucene Users List
Betreff: Re: How to get all field values from a Hits object?
: is it possible to
On Jan 17, 2005, at 4:51 AM, Chris Lamprecht wrote:
I submitted a testcase --
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33134
I reviewed and applied your contributed unit test. Thanks!
Erik
-
To unsubscribe,
Okay, so Im trying to find the sweet spot on how many index segments I
should have.
I have 47 million records of contact data (Name + Address). I used 7
machines to build indexes that resulted in the following spread of
individual indexes:
1503000
150
1497000
5604750
5379750
1437000
I do these kinds of queries all the time. I found that the fastest
performance for my collections (millions of documents) came from
subclassing Filter using the set of primary keys from the database to
make the Filter, and then doing the query with the
Searcher.search(query,filter) interface. I
Ryan Aslett wrote:
What I found was that for queries with one term (First Name), the large
index beat the multiple indexes hands down (280 Queries/per second vs
170 Q/s).
But for queries with multiple terms (Address), the multiple indexes beat
out the Large index. (26 Q/s vs 16 Q/s)
Btw, Im
: Thanks for your tips. I am trying to get a more thorough understanding
: why this would be better.
1) give serious consideration to just putting all of your data in lucene
for the purposes of searching. the intial example mentioned employees,
and salaries and wanted to search for employees
Jian,
I'd like to know when I use Lucene, normally under what condition I
should use the db (berkeley db) directory instead of using the
standard file system based directory?
Could you please let me know some brief comparisons of using berkeley
db vs. using file system and what is better?
Hello,
We are using Lucene to index scientific articles.
We are also using Luke to verify the fields and values we index.
One of the fields we index is the author field that consists of the authors
that have written the scientific article (an example of such data is shown
at the bottom of the
On Jan 18, 2005, at 22:26, Andi Vajda wrote:
With the release of Berkeley DB 4.3.x, Sleepycat radically changed the
Java API to C Berkeley DB.
Hmmm... out of curiosity... any reason not to use the Berkeley DB Java
Edition instead of the Java API to C Berkeley DB?
Hmmm... out of curiosity... any reason not to use the Berkeley DB Java
Edition instead of the Java API to C Berkeley DB?
http://www.sleepycat.com/products/je.shtml
Well, normally, if you're in a 100% Java situation, you could use the
Berkeley
DB Java edition instead. I'm not. I'm using the same
On Jan 19, 2005, at 00:02, Andi Vajda wrote:
Well, normally, if you're in a 100% Java situation, you could use the
Berkeley
DB Java edition instead.
Alternatively, did anyone played with JDBM [1] to achieve the same
result?
I'm not. I'm using the same code with Chandler, a
python program, and
11 matches
Mail list logo