Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 30357 invoked from network); 4 Sep 2005 16:22:33 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Sep 2005 16:22:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 7833 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2005 16:22:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 7791 invoked by uid 500); 4 Sep 2005 16:22:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 7778 invoked by uid 99); 4 Sep 2005 16:22:28 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Sep 2005 09:22:28 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_BY_IP,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of jeff.rodenburg@gmail.com designates 64.233.184.193 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.184.193] (HELO wproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.184.193) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 04 Sep 2005 09:22:41 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i25so295064wra for ; Sun, 04 Sep 2005 09:22:26 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=kt6CLrtvm9DSaFOGJlMF+6Ys2UcGsNwdEnKqJTpKySYlX38GQ/kGLS4f980f0ldX26uD9ZccadG7HRpiGPf1K2z0xRF5ZLYFHEbDFPLd0jO0YDs9ceS505x+SXOP14saqT8HCeolQqwHabXpVI64OOQknZh5AfFR3UJkfcZWEzk= Received: by 10.54.33.26 with SMTP id g26mr3205711wrg; Sun, 04 Sep 2005 09:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.13.32 with HTTP; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 09:22:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <50f4333605090409227d344d2a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2005 09:22:26 -0700 From: Jeff Rodenburg Reply-To: jeff.rodenburg@gmail.com To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: "Right" combination of analyzers for indexing and searching Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_685_17281271.1125850946352" X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N ------=_Part_685_17281271.1125850946352 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Question to those who've deployed and maintained Lucene: any recommendation= s=20 or observations about practical decisions regarding analyzer choice in=20 indexing & searching? What have you found in operation to work well, become= =20 difficult, yield better/worse results, affect performance, etc.? What would= =20 you do differently if you were starting from scratch? Cheers from sunny Seattle, jeff r. ------=_Part_685_17281271.1125850946352--