Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 59960 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2007 02:38:39 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Jun 2007 02:38:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 79808 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jun 2007 02:38:40 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 79763 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jun 2007 02:38:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 79750 invoked by uid 99); 4 Jun 2007 02:38:40 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:38:40 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-100.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.4] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.4) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 03 Jun 2007 19:38:36 -0700 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE47D71418F for ; Sun, 3 Jun 2007 19:38:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <29469842.1180924695973.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 19:38:15 -0700 (PDT) From: "Hoss Man (JIRA)" To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-446) search.function - (1) score based on field value, (2) simple score customizability In-Reply-To: <1335068423.1128457428687.JavaMail.jira@ajax.apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-446?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12501082 ] Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-446: --------------------------------- Doron: I haven't really been able to keep up with the way this issue has evolved, or dig into your new patches, but to answer your question about the Ord functions: yes they are very useful, and it active use in Solr. I believe the warning about MultiSearcher mainly has to do with the fact that the MultiSearcher/FieldCache APIs give us know way to know the "lowest" of "highest" value in a field cache across an entire logical index, so the Ord functions can't really be queried against a MultiSearcher. > search.function - (1) score based on field value, (2) simple score customizability > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-446 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-446 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: Search > Reporter: Yonik Seeley > Assignee: Doron Cohen > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 2.2 > > Attachments: function.patch.txt, function.patch.txt, function.zip, function.zip > > > FunctionQuery can return a score based on a field's value or on it's ordinal value. > FunctionFactory subclasses define the details of the function. There is currently a LinearFloatFunction (a line specified by slope and intercept). > Field values are typically obtained from FieldValueSourceFactory. Implementations include FloatFieldSource, IntFieldSource, and OrdFieldSource. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org