Greetings.
Can anyone point me to a how-to tutorial on how to
access Lucene from a web page generated by PHP pr
Perl? I've been looking but couldn't find anything.
Thanks a lot.
And
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
Hi Bryan,
How big is your index?
Also what is the advantage of binding a user to a
server?
Thanks.
Andy
--- Bryan McCormick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi chris,
I'm responsible for the webshots.com search index
and we've had very
good results with lucene. It currently indexes over
100
.
It is available under an LGPL license and source code, binaries and info
are avaialble here:
http://ejindex.sourceforge.net
I'd love to get some feedback, so if your iterested, please let me know
your comments or suggestions;)
regards,
Andy Scholz
to Peter's first
suggestion - unzip it read the XML.
cheers
-andy
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and remotely -
these should(!) fail if there is a problem and hopefully give more
indication as to what the problem might be.
Thanks for your feedback!
Regards,
Andy Scholz
Hi Andy
This looks like a very useful MBean (quite a bit more developed than the
one I was working on).
One quick query
Thanks Otis...
With any luck my current employer will also chip in a few bucks to help
maintain the project (I'm working on it)...
cheers
-andy
Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
Thanks, I'm finally including this on the Contributions page.
Otis
--- Andy Scholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi All
(SegmentReader.java:162)
at org.apache.lucene.store.Lock$With.run(Lock.java:148)
at org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentReader.doClose(SegmentReader.java:157)
at org.apache.lucene.index.IndexReader.close(IndexReader.java:422)
Help!
- andy g
code that triggers this:
// dbdir is a working
this helps is because of the disk I/O speed
bounding of performance that the others have mentioned, and how adding
another disk array adds to the effective disk bandwidth.
good luck
- andy g
On Fri, 07 May 2004 04:47:55 +0500, Will Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I am considering
got much simpler and faster.
- andy g
On Tue, 18 May 2004 10:38:01 -0700, Claude Devarenne
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have over 60,000 documents in my index which is slightly over a 1 GB
in size. The documents range from the late seventies up to now. I
have indexed dates as a keyword
setup entirely to 1.4.
- andy g
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 07:56:27 -0700 (PDT), Greg Gershman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I looked around a bit, but couldn't find an answer to
this question. There doesn't seem to be any reason
why it wouldn't, from what I can see, but I just want
to make sure I don't
are different. Here's an example:
I added the field AUTHOR_SORTABLE to most of the documents in the
index. But if one of the AUTHOR_SORTABLE field in a document is set
to andy, and i search for andy, this document gets a very
different score than it used to.
Since my added fields aren't set in stone
thanks that was my problem, i had code extending the search out to all
the fields, now it only extends the search out to the fields i'm
interested in.
- andy g
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 14:21:24 -0500 , Tim Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This seems like it would be determined by how you generate
kind of results you are looking for. It's probably
not as fast as the one big data field method, but speed is not an
issue yet for anything i've done, whereas code maintenance is a pain,
witness my question that started this thread.
- andy g
On Wed, 2 Jun 2004 13:43:41 -0700 , Gus Kormeier [EMAIL
I used BDB + lucene successfully using the lucene 1.3 distribution,
but it broke in my application with the 1.4 distribution. The 1.4
dist uses a different file system by default, the cluster file
system, so maybe that is the source of the issues.
good luck,
andy g
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 19:36:51
I had this problem when i initially upgraded to 1.4, but tomcat was
still searching with the old 1.3 jar. Make sure you have fully
updated its path variables, include directories, etc.
- andy g
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:00:42 +0200, gaudinat
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks,
Finally my
)
at org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.optimize(IndexWriter.java:366)
this is preventing me from optimizing the indexes, and also scares me
that information might be missing.
Does anybody know what's going on here, and what might be wrong?
Thanks for your time,
- andy g
was previously using the
in memory merge, but the memory requirements were crashing the JVM
when we had a lot of simultaneous users.
- andy g
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 23:03:00 +0530, sunil goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
Thanks for the answers. I was looking for a best practice guide to do
Maybe you should try making a BooleanQuery out of the TermQuerys and
then passing that to QueryFilter. I've never tried it, but it should
work, right?
- andy g
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:02:26 -0600, Jerry Jalenak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In looking at the examples for filtering of hits, it looks
document, but it doesn't
phase lucene. Actually when choosing an indexing solution, we chose
lucene mostly because of its ability to index and store unlimited
kinds of metadata.
- andy g
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Hello, I've searched on previous posts on this topic but couldn't find an answer. I
want to query my index (which are a number of 'flattened' Oracle tables) for some
criteria, then return Hits such that there are no Documents that duplicate a
particular field. In the case where table A has a
20 matches
Mail list logo
