Hi ,
I want to filter out particular urls from search result.
How can i use the filters for this situations
Any one Plz give me the solutions for this with example.
Thanx
Suresh
--
View this message in context:
Yes. This seems to have fixed the problem. All, do we want to create a
JIRA and commit this for the 0.9 release?
Dennis
Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
Doğacan Güney wrote:
Hi,
On 3/28/07, Dennis Kubes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is definitely a hadoop problem. This is similar to the
Dennis Kubes wrote:
Yes. This seems to have fixed the problem. All, do we want to create
a JIRA and commit this for the 0.9 release?
FYI, this looks like NUTCH-333:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NUTCH-333.
St.Ack
Dennis
Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
Doğacan Güney wrote:
Hi,
On
Dennis Kubes wrote:
Yes. This seems to have fixed the problem. All, do we want to create a
JIRA and commit this for the 0.9 release?
It should definitely go into the release, and we need a patch for the
trunk/ .
Actually, I'm somewhat surprised that we have tags/release-0.9 but we
don't
Hi all,
I know it's a trivial issue, but still ... When this release is out, I
propose that we should name the next release 1.0.0, and not 0.10.0. The
effect is purely psychological, but it also reflects our confidence in
the platform.
Many Open Source projects are afraid of going to 1.0.0
Well, it's just going to add more work for me, but in the end, it's probably
something that needs to be in there. I could go either way on this though,
as in, if we don't commit it, 0.9.1 shouldn't be far off. Here's my +1 for
going ahead and committing it...
On 3/28/07 10:21 AM, Dennis Kubes
Another way of looking at it might be to ask the question what would make a
great 1.0 release? What new features would be awesome? What might get people
more excited?
Having a 1.0 might make the project look like it has attained a real milestone.
Steve
-Original Message-
From:
+1
Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
Hi all,
I know it's a trivial issue, but still ... When this release is out, I
propose that we should name the next release 1.0.0, and not 0.10.0. The
effect is purely psychological, but it also reflects our confidence in
the platform.
I think that a 1.0
Hey guys,
I have a mapreduce job that sets up a directory for pagerank. It iterates
over all the segments and then outputs a MapFile containing the data. When I
go to open the outputted directory with another MapReduce job it fails
saying that it cannot find the path. The path that it thinks it is
Let me actually refine that question we do some directories like the linkdb
have a current, and why do others like parse_data not? Is there a convention
on this?
Steve
-Original Message-
From: Steve Severance [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 4:11 PM
To:
Steve Severance wrote:
Let me actually refine that question we do some directories like the linkdb
have a current, and why do others like parse_data not? Is there a convention
on this?
First, to answer your original question: you should use
MapFileOutputFormat class for reading such output.
My +1 for 1.0.0. I already changed it to 0.10.0, but this can be easily
reverted, and was probably something that I should have brought to the
attention of the dev list before I did that (sorry about that). In any case,
I think 1.0.0 makes a lot of sense, politically, and software wise. Nutch is
Hello,
sounds good. one question is we have taged release-0.9, and this release has
been there in some mirror sites of nutch, and people downloaded this version,
so there would be two nutch-0.9 exist in the world, how could people differ
between them.
Thanks
David
Chris Mattmann ：
2007/3/28, Andrzej Bialecki [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Dennis Kubes wrote:
Yes. This seems to have fixed the problem. All, do we want to create a
JIRA and commit this for the 0.9 release?
It should definitely go into the release, and we need a patch for the
trunk/ .
+1
Actually, I'm somewhat
14 matches
Mail list logo
