lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alberto Squassabia" <alber...@optimus-corp.com>
Subject RE: query behavior
Date Tue, 27 Sep 2005 16:42:44 GMT
Mr. Elschot: 

> In what way is your problem similar?  

same:

(1) large document spaces (millions);
(2) searches at intersection of AND with one side of the AND sporting
only a few matches, and the other side sporting large match sets.

different:

(3) greater variety of data types

Alberto S
albertos_at_optimus-corp_dot_com

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Elschot [mailto:paul.elschot@xs4all.nl] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 1:04 AM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: query behavior

On Tuesday 27 September 2005 01:13, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> 
> I *believe* that because of the ConjunctionScorer in 1.9, 
> [...]
> to score things that the un-common clause has allready given a score
of 0.0.

ConjunctionScorer is already used in 1.4 for boolean queries with only
required clauses.

> 
> :
> : <quote>
> : ---------------------------------
> : Tue, 06 Jan 2004
> : [...]
> : I have a index with documents that have only 2 fields, the first
> : (unique) is 'very unique', in that most document have at least 
> somewhat
> : varying terms, the second is a boolean that contains only (boolean)
> : 'true' or 'false'. The index contains 100,000,000+ documents.
> : If I perform the following search "+unique:somevalue +boolean:true',
> : lucene with search on the first term, returning very few documents, 
> but
> : then it will search the second term, returning possibly a million+
> : documents, then it will intersect the list, return 'hits' of only a 
> few
> : documents.
> : [. . .]
> : This behavior has been observed with the 1.3 final code.
> : Robert Engels
> : ---------------------------------
> : </quote>
> :
> : Can anyone tell me if that is still true for 1.4?  Or if there are 
> any
> : optimizations that is possible to hardcode in such a case (I have a
> : similar problem).

The ConjunctionScorer in 1.4 will do this optimization in the case of a
query with only required clauses.
In what way is your problem similar? The development version has
"similar" facilities for required/optional and required/excluded
queries.

Regards,
Paul Elschot.




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message