Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 11:27:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Hostetter <hossman_lucene@fucit.org>
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Generalized proximity query performance
In-Reply-To: <B4C30241-C35B-49B4-BE3B-FAA8A4DB4E11@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0710051126050.29876@radix.cryptio.net>
References: <a76d475c0710031717y526af717p50b4ec4d254e4841@mail.gmail.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.62.0710051050260.23452@radix.cryptio.net>
 <B4C30241-C35B-49B4-BE3B-FAA8A4DB4E11@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


: > : would like to allow for the possibility that a and b are near each other
: > in
: > : one field, while c is in another field.

: I understand the OP to want a PhraseQuery that has an intention (rather than
: side-effect) of doing proximity-based scoring.
: 
: "phrase query here"~1000 is the current hack that performs fine for N < 3
: query terms, but fails currently for N >= 3 since it requires that all the
: terms be present.  For larger queries, this effectively nullifies the
: usefulness of the phrase query approach.

that's what i thought first too, and it is a problem i'd eventaully like 
to tackle ... it was the part about "c" being in a differnet field from 
"a" and "b" that confused me ... i don't know what that exactly is being 
suggested here.


-Hoss


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