| clear query|facets|time |
Search criteria: TermQParserPlugin.
Results from 21 to 30 from
322 (0.4s).
|
|
|
Loading phrases to help you
refine your search...
|
|
remove seek-back in terms dict / fold appending codec into default? - Lucene - [mail # dev]
|
|
...Just looking at the previous thread, I wonder if we should consider removing AppendingCodec and just removing this seek stuff. Currently this is essentially metadata stuff in terms dict...
|
|
.../index (e.g. terms dict field summary section and offsets for each field in terms index: https://builds.apache.org/job/Lucene-trunk/javadoc/core/org/apache/lucene/codecs/lucene40/Lucene40Postings...
|
|
|
Author: Robert Muir,
2012-06-26, 15:32
|
|
|
Re: svn commit: r1433177 - /lucene/dev/trunk/lucene/core/src/test/org/apache/lucene/index/TestIndexWriterWithThreads.java - Lucene - [mail # dev]
|
|
... an uncaught exception in another thread from the codec's TermVectorsWriter finishDocument(): e.g. http://fortyounce.servebeer.com/job/the%204547%20machine%20gun/848/console (run the seed with -Dtests...
|
|
|
Author: Robert Muir,
2013-01-27, 19:42
|
|
|
Re: problem with 'ant resolve' - Lucene - [mail # dev]
|
|
...Currently ivy has a limited set of "LockFactory" available. Unfortunately only none or simple. There is no "native". So short term, nuke .lck file leftover from maybe a control-c'ed JVM...
|
|
|
Author: Robert Muir,
2013-01-16, 04:24
|
|
|
[SOLR-3405] maven artifacts should be equivalent to binary packaging - Solr - [issue]
|
|
... in solr/lib) at all.
binary distribution contains only the jars necessary for solrj and contrib plugins, and a solr.war
I think the maven artifacts should match whats in the binary release (no...
|
|
|
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-3405
Author: Robert Muir,
2012-12-29, 15:53
|
|
|
Re: Optimize facets when actually single valued? - Lucene - [mail # dev]
|
|
...On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Ryan McKinley wrote: I dont know of one: but feel free! I thought of the stats situation at some point: terms.size == terms.sumDocFreq should be enough i...
|
|
... think, for faceting purposes? doesnt really mean the field is truly "single valued", because a term could exist twice for the same doc, but for faceting etc, we dont care about that I think...
|
[+ show more]
[- hide]
| ...? if we really want to check that no term has tf > 1 within a doc, we'd have to involve sumTotalTermFreq too: which is irrelevant here and unavailable if frequencies are omitted ... |
|
|
Author: Robert Muir,
2012-12-19, 01:16
|
|
|
Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-trunk-Linux-Java7-64-test-only - Build # 18816 - Failure! - Lucene - [mail # dev]
|
|
....BlockTreeTermsReader.close(BlockTreeTermsReader.java:233) [junit4:junit4] 1> at org.apache.lucene.util.IOUtils.close(IOUtils.java:174) [junit4:junit4] 1> at org.apache.lucene.codecs...
|
|
|
Author: Robert Muir,
2013-01-03, 18:30
|
|
|
Re: remove seek-back in terms dict / fold appending codec into default? - Lucene - [mail # dev]
|
|
... it matters to nuke this from our alternative terms index impls (e.g. VariableGap). Anyway, I think those matters can be a separate issue: I do think it might be worth it to remove the seeks in our...
|
|
... default term dictionary implementation though. lucidimagination.com ...
|
|
|
Author: Robert Muir,
2012-06-26, 17:42
|
|
|
Re: remove seek-back in terms dict / fold appending codec into default? - Lucene - [mail # dev]
|
|
...what's the concern? a read-once file we slurp in hurts nothing as far as open file limits etc. I don't think we should be so damn crazy about # of files anyway: we have cfs as a solution for...
|
|
|
Author: Robert Muir,
2012-06-26, 23:21
|
|
|
Re: VOTE: release 3.6.2 - Lucene - [mail # dev]
|
|
...'t great for people that want the feature, but i feel we should be really careful with these bugfix releases myself. Terms index bug is a whole different story though! ...
|
|
|
Author: Robert Muir,
2012-12-19, 22:53
|
|
|
Re: [jira] [Updated] (SOLR-3700) Create a Classification component - Lucene - [mail # dev]
|
|
...I got the patch before JIRA was down, and just saw another thing: + private double countInClassC(String c) throws IOException { + TopDocs topDocs = indexSearcher.search(new Term...
|
|
...Query(new Term(classFieldName, c)), Integer.MAX_VALUE); + int res = 0; + for (ScoreDoc scoreDoc : topDocs.scoreDocs) { + Fields termVectors indexSearcher.getIndexReader().getTerm...
|
[+ show more]
[- hide]
| ...Vectors(scoreDoc.doc); + if (termVectors != null) { + res += termVectors.terms(textFieldName).size(); + } else { + // TODO : warn about not existing term vectors for field 'text... |
| ...FieldName' + } + } + return res; + } For this part, I am unsure what the statistic is you are driving for: It seems currently that it takes all documents that have term c in field classFieldName, and sums... |
| ... the number of unique terms each doc has that in field classFieldName? If this is really what you want and you need 100% exact numbers, just like the other computation i would not do a search... |
|
|
Author: Robert Muir,
2012-08-10, 13:05
|
|
|
|
