lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From c...@lanlab.de
Subject Re: Term boosting
Date Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 GMT
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
X-RCPT-TO: <ed@braggfamily.com>
Status: U
X-UIDL: 332315228

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>



--
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