Too many clauses

Another way around it is to increase the max clause count.

//Setting the clause Count
BooleanQuery.setMaxClauseCount(int);

Can use maxint or some number smaller.. When I set this high, I have had
to set the java pool higher for memory as well.

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Sharma, Siddharth
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 3:32 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Too many clauses

Query: caught a class org.apache.lucene.queryParser.ParseException
with message: Too many boolean clauses

I realize why this is happening (the 1024 clauses limit for
BooleanQuery).
My question is more design related.

During customer registration, the customer defines a set of
skus/products
that we should never display to them. These products are part of our
catalog
offering but we are forbidden to make them available to this customer.
This
list is called the block list and can potentially be large (6 to 7
thousand).

When a customer logs in, this block list is identified and currently I
am
using QueryParser to parse these skus to block/exclude. That is why I am
hitting against the 1024 upper bound.

To circumvent it, here are a few options that I have thought of:
1. Chunk it up:
a. Create a filter based on a query that has a maximum of 1024.
b. Get its bits.
c. Get the next 1024 blocked skus and create a filter out of it and
get
its bits.
d. AND the two BitSets.
e. Do this till all blocked skus and other filters are ANDed together
for
the final BitSet.

2. Build the block list into the index somehow
a. My index is based on SKUs, not on customer.
b. I could add a field in each SKU document that contains the
customer-ids

who want this SKU blocked.
c. But this field's value could be very large.

3. Some other obvious way that I am stupid enough not to be able to
visualize.

Thanks in advance
Sid





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Hi all,

I need urgent help for the following issues.



What is the query string to retrieve all the documents indexed
(something similar to *.*)?
In a program I have indexed 10 files. When I do a search using the query
"contents:java", it will return 2 documents. But when I give
"-contents:java", then it will return an empty result set. Does anyone
know what the right query string for this? I.e., to retrieve all
documents that does not contain the word 'java'.
What is the query string to retrieve all the documents which content is
empty?


Please help me as soon as possible



Thanks

Jibu


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

I thought of that but I had that listed as a last fallback option because I
was not sure what it meant in terms of performance since I am a newbie to
Lucene.
So if I bump up my heap (I assume that's what you are referring to when you
say java pool) it'll be ok?
Are there metrics around this?
At x max_clauses, jvm heap should be y meg
At x + 1024, it should be z meg




-----Original Message-----
From: Aigner, Thomas
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 3:42 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: Too many clauses

Another way around it is to increase the max clause count.

//Setting the clause Count
BooleanQuery.setMaxClauseCount(int);

Can use maxint or some number smaller.. When I set this high, I have had
to set the java pool higher for memory as well.

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Sharma, Siddharth
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 3:32 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Too many clauses

Query: caught a class org.apache.lucene.queryParser.ParseException
with message: Too many boolean clauses

I realize why this is happening (the 1024 clauses limit for
BooleanQuery).
My question is more design related.

During customer registration, the customer defines a set of
skus/products
that we should never display to them. These products are part of our
catalog
offering but we are forbidden to make them available to this customer.
This
list is called the block list and can potentially be large (6 to 7
thousand).

When a customer logs in, this block list is identified and currently I
am
using QueryParser to parse these skus to block/exclude. That is why I am
hitting against the 1024 upper bound.

To circumvent it, here are a few options that I have thought of:
1. Chunk it up:
a. Create a filter based on a query that has a maximum of 1024.
b. Get its bits.
c. Get the next 1024 blocked skus and create a filter out of it and
get
its bits.
d. AND the two BitSets.
e. Do this till all blocked skus and other filters are ANDed together
for
the final BitSet.

2. Build the block list into the index somehow
a. My index is based on SKUs, not on customer.
b. I could add a field in each SKU document that contains the
customer-ids

who want this SKU blocked.
c. But this field's value could be very large.

3. Some other obvious way that I am stupid enough not to be able to
visualize.

Thanks in advance
Sid





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

:
: To circumvent it, here are a few options that I have thought of:
: 1. Chunk it up:
: a. Create a filter based on a query that has a maximum of 1024.
: b. Get its bits.
: c. Get the next 1024 blocked skus and create a filter out of it and get
: its bits.
: d. AND the two BitSets.
: e. Do this till all blocked skus and other filters are ANDed together for
: the final BitSet.

Instead of building up your filter based on a query, why not build up your
filter directly? ... Using a QueryFilter requires that scoring happen --
but you don't care about the scoring, you just want to know if a doc
matches a keyword or not. Take a look at the way RangeFilter is
implimented. it should be able to searve as a good example of how you can
write a "SetFilter" that takes in a field name and a set of keywords, and
only "passes" documents where one of the keywords shows up as an indexed
value for that field. Now you don't have toworry baout the 1024 limit,
you don't have to "chunk" anything, your searches will be faster because
you don't need to worry about the scoring aspects of a the BooleanQueries.


Hint: you can sort the input Set, and then iterate over it, pulling out
the TermDocs for each, and scoring each doc in each TermDocs. now your
Filter indicates all the products that do match those skus, and you'll
want an "InverseFilter to wrap it and indicate all the products that
*don't* match those skus.



-Hoss


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Thanks Chris

I haven't tried it yet, but I think I understand your idea now (after 24
hours, man I'm slow on the uptake;)
I'll try it today.
-Sid


-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Hostetter
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 5:05 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Too many clauses

:
: To circumvent it, here are a few options that I have thought of:
: 1. Chunk it up:
: a. Create a filter based on a query that has a maximum of 1024.
: b. Get its bits.
: c. Get the next 1024 blocked skus and create a filter out of it and get
: its bits.
: d. AND the two BitSets.
: e. Do this till all blocked skus and other filters are ANDed together
for
: the final BitSet.

Instead of building up your filter based on a query, why not build up your
filter directly? ... Using a QueryFilter requires that scoring happen --
but you don't care about the scoring, you just want to know if a doc
matches a keyword or not. Take a look at the way RangeFilter is
implimented. it should be able to searve as a good example of how you can
write a "SetFilter" that takes in a field name and a set of keywords, and
only "passes" documents where one of the keywords shows up as an indexed
value for that field. Now you don't have toworry baout the 1024 limit,
you don't have to "chunk" anything, your searches will be faster because
you don't need to worry about the scoring aspects of a the BooleanQueries.


Hint: you can sort the input Set, and then iterate over it, pulling out
the TermDocs for each, and scoring each doc in each TermDocs. now your
Filter indicates all the products that do match those skus, and you'll
want an "InverseFilter to wrap it and indicate all the products that
*don't* match those skus.



-Hoss


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]