lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Clemens Marschner" <c...@lanlab.de>
Subject Re: Term boosting
Date Sat, 21 Sep 2002 16:41:50 GMT
I had the same problem as Brian. But since you have to rewrite the query
anyway to do a query in two different fields it makes no difference if you
use term or field boosting. Performance is the same.
For new applications I'd say field boosting is a little simpler because you
save on some commands during the query rewriting phase. Since I already had
written that when field boosting came up, for me there is no difference.

Btw. I changed the query classes to allow query rewriting. I made them
Cloneable and added setter methods for them. If there's interest I'll
contribute the patches asap.

--Clemens

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Murzaku" <murzaku@yahoo.com>
To: "Lucene Users List" <lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 5:38 PM
Subject: Re: Term boosting


> Wouldn't field boosting (the new capability added as of
> http://www.mail-archive.com/lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org/msg01727.html)
> be a simpler solution?


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message