lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com>
Subject Re: Issue upgrading from lucene 2.3.2 to 2.4 (moving from bitset to docidset)
Date Tue, 09 Dec 2008 09:47:45 GMT

This use case sounds alot like faceted navigation, which Solr provides.

Mike

Michael Stoppelman wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm working on upgrading to Lucene 2.4.0 from 2.3.2 and was trying to
> integrate the new DodIdSet changes since o.a.l.search.Filter#bits()  
> method
> is now depreciated. For our app we actually heavily rely on bits  
> from the
> Filter to do post-query filtering (I explain why below).
>
> For example, if someone searches for product: "ipod" and then  
> filters a
> type: "nano" (e.g. mini/nano/regular) AND color: "red" (e.g.
> red/yellow/blue). In our current model the results are gathered in the
> following way:
>
> 1) "ipod" w/o attributes is run and the results are stored in a  
> hitcollector
> 2) "ipod" results are now filtered for color="red" AND type="mini"  
> using the
> lucene Filters
> 3) The filtered results are returned to the user.
>
> The reason that the attributes are filtered post-query is so that we  
> can
> return the other types and colors the user can filter by in the  
> future.
> Meaning the UI would be able to show "blue", "green", "pink", etc...  
> if we
> pre-filtered results by color and type before hand we wouldn't know  
> what the
> other filter options would be there for a broader result set.
>
> Does anyone else have this use case? I'd imagine other folks are  
> probably
> doing similar things to accomplish this.
>
> M


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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