Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 30810 invoked from network); 24 Mar 2007 21:01:24 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Mar 2007 21:01:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 11066 invoked by uid 500); 24 Mar 2007 21:01:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 11018 invoked by uid 500); 24 Mar 2007 21:01:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 11007 invoked by uid 99); 24 Mar 2007 21:01:25 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 24 Mar 2007 14:01:25 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [209.86.89.70] (HELO elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net) (209.86.89.70) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 24 Mar 2007 14:01:16 -0700 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=mfADyjaGh9SibXhxEk53sEAYM71yd+loeh4i15W5BEt9hXcqkmWAhSN4HOmW/fwk; h=Received:Mime-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:Content-Type:To:From:Subject:Date:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [68.255.96.9] (helo=[192.168.1.64]) by elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1HVDM7-0005j5-Dm for java-dev@lucene.apache.org; Sat, 24 Mar 2007 17:00:55 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <789D9A82-7E1E-4FA0-990C-46D29757F41A@ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed To: Lucene-Dev From: robert engels Subject: non indexed field query clauses? help wanted Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2007 16:00:59 -0500 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) X-ELNK-Trace: 33cbdd8ed9881ca8776432462e451d7bd15d05d9470ff7107430d278600487ae05526fbf68eafb91350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 68.255.96.9 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I see that there is a lot of activity going on with query clauses (FunctionQuery, etc.) Has anyone thought again about having a query clause that operated on stored (non-indexed) values? It would seem that a query optimizer would want to evaluate these queries last, since they obviously would be "poorer" performing, and you would want to limit the number of documents retrieved. I understand that this is not trivial, or may not perform very well, since you might have a query like (+indexedterm +storedterm) OR (+storedterm2) AND (storedterm >= somevalue and storedterm2<=somevalue) in which every document would need to be searched (to match +storedterm2). I also understand that this brings Lucene closed to a db, but it would be really helpful in many cases, since it is not possible to evaluate ANY query against a document because indexed non-stored fields are not available to match against easily. I am just out of time at this point to do the work required to do this correctly. I am fairly convinced I can get our firm to offer a cash bounty to the developer who implements it ! Let me know, Robert Engels --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org