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: domain of gsiasf@gmail.com designates
 209.85.160.176 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=sender:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date
         :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer;
        b=XtCYHa29PvbLU93KuzQyFeAozr1qhHKtq/1JMKcy4nQkzxZEDjgSoYscnWUi0f1/1P
         xxFUdFBVLxJoYT9htwBnv2iR0WspFXlwFVKsYGLeEvQfYy1PH6nfBTCA8SLeK+G6KGQz
         Kper5OKjYGBpc0xywAkrsu32kjlQHTQzqjNAs=
Sender: Grant Ingersoll <gsiasf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
Subject: Re: TermDocs
From: Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100512223913.979D7478445@athena.apache.org>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 09:08:31 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6D8B25C5-D1DB-4E13-8D81-9023945E58DD@apache.org>
References: <20100512223913.979D7478445@athena.apache.org>
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org


On May 12, 2010, at 7:42 PM, roy-lucene-user@xemaps.com wrote:

> Hi guys,
>=20
> I've had this code for some time but am just now questioning if it =
works.
>=20
> I have a custom filter that i've been using since Lucene 1.4 to Lucene =
2.2.0 and it essentially builds up a BitSet like so:
>=20
> for ( int x =3D 0; x < fields.length; x++ ) {
>    for ( int y =3D 0; y < values.length; y++ ) {
>    TermDocs termDocs =3D reader.termDocs( new Term( fields[x], =
values[y] ) );
>    try {
>        while ( termDocs.next() ) {
>            int doc =3D termDocs.doc();
>            bits.set( doc );
>        }
>    }
>    finally {
>        termDocs.close();
>    }
>    }
> }
>=20
> I notice that it grabs all the TermDocs for the first field and value =
but nothing after that.  But I do know that the other values exist but I =
don't get any TermDocs afterwards.
>=20

That code works for me against Lucene 3.0.1 (and I don't think much has =
changed there).  Are you sure the fields and values are lining up right? =
 Perhaps isolate this on a standalone index to convince yourself.  Have =
you looked at Luke to validate?

However, why not just create a Filter from a Query and get the =
bitset/docidset using the MultiFieldQueryParser?

//Here's a snippet I wrote, never mind the PayloadAnalyzer, just =
substitute in your analyzer
MultiFieldQueryParser mfqp =3D new =
MultiFieldQueryParser(Version.LUCENE_30, fields, new =
PayloadAnalyzer(encoder));
    Query query =3D mfqp.parse(Version.LUCENE_30, values, fields, new =
PayloadAnalyzer(encoder));
    Filter filter =3D new QueryWrapperFilter(query);
    DocIdSet docs =3D filter.getDocIdSet(reader);
    DocIdSetIterator docIdSetIterator =3D docs.iterator();
    while (docIdSetIterator.nextDoc() !=3D =
DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS){
      System.out.println("Doc: " + docIdSetIterator.docID());
    }


--------------------------
Grant Ingersoll
http://www.lucidimagination.com/

Search the Lucene ecosystem using Solr/Lucene: =
http://www.lucidimagination.com/search


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