Cristina Belderrain wrote:
On 10/9/06, Tomi NA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is *exactly* what I was thinking. Like Stefan, I believe the
nutch analyzer is a good foundation and should therefore be extended
to support the or operator, and possibly additional capabilities
when the need
2006/10/10, Cristina Belderrain [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 10/9/06, Tomi NA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is *exactly* what I was thinking. Like Stefan, I believe the
nutch analyzer is a good foundation and should therefore be extended
to support the or operator, and possibly additional
Tomi said:
In conclusion, my position is pragmatic: I welcome the simplest
solution to implement the or search. I just believe that it'd be
easiest to do that extending the nutch Analyzer.
This seems like a very reasonable approach. I too would very much like
OR. It would also be nice if it
2006/10/8, Stefan Neufeind [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
if it's not the full feature-set, maybe most people could live with it.
But basic boolean queries I think were the root for this topic. Is there
an easier way to allow this in Nutch as well instead of throwing quite
a bit away and using the
On 10/9/06, Tomi NA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is *exactly* what I was thinking. Like Stefan, I believe the
nutch analyzer is a good foundation and should therefore be extended
to support the or operator, and possibly additional capabilities
when the need arises.
t.n.a.
Tomi, why would
Hello,
I just would like to confirm that the version of the search() method
shown in the previous post works fine, at least regarding boolean
queries. Anyway, I see no reason why it wouldn't work with any other
Lucene query (fuzzy, proximity, etc.).
Now, please be warned that the inclusion of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Am 07.10.2006 um 17:40 schrieb Cristina Belderrain:
Let me remind you that all this must be done just to provide something
that's already there: Nutch is built on top of Lucene, after all. If
it's hard to understand why Lucene's capabilities
Nevertheless, I agree that there should be an option to choose the
Lucene query engine instead of the Nutch flavour one because Nutch has
been proven to be equally suitable for areas which do not require as
efficient queries (like intranet crawling for instance) as an all-out
web indexing
Björn Wilmsmann wrote:
Am 07.10.2006 um 17:40 schrieb Cristina Belderrain:
Let me remind you that all this must be done just to provide something
that's already there: Nutch is built on top of Lucene, after all. If
it's hard to understand why Lucene's capabilities were simply
neutralized
Hi,
yes, I guess having the full strength of Lucene-based queries would be
nice. That would as well solve the boolean queries-question I had a few
days ago :-)
Ravi, doesn't Lucene also allow querying of other fields? Is there any
possibility to add that feature to your proposal?
In general:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi everybody,
On 05/10/2006 05:44 Ravi Chintakunta wrote:
public Hits search(String queryString, int numHits,
String dedupField, String sortField, boolean
reverse) throws IOException {
Hi Björn,
yes, the error you point out will happen indeed... A possible
workaround would be:
public Hits search(String queryString, int numHits,
String dedupField, String sortField, boolean reverse)
throws IOException {
org.apache.lucene.queryParser.QueryParser parser =
12 matches
Mail list logo
