search for: indexor

Hello, I'm new on this list. First of all, thank you to all the developers of this great project! At the moment there is only an application that keeps me on both macos and windows, its name is PWGL a free environment for computer assisted composition in openGL. (http://www2.siba.fi/PWGL/) I'm running Ubuntu 8.04 and wine 0.9.59. I have to say that I also installed vcrun2005 and

OK, I'm indexing my data with the scriptindex. I want to be able to restrict the search by the category field. Do I need to do anything to the data itself? Like, literally prefix it with the characters "XC"? Below is my indexor for scriptindex and the my php code... document_id : field=ref unique=Q boolean=Q search_id : field=document_id index=S document_title : field=title weight=3 unhtml index landing_page : field=landing_page document_text : field=document_text unhtml index abstract: field=abstract category: field=cat...

Not to stir the pot, but I notice my email address has recently been harvested from this list for spamming purposes. This email address is unique and not used for anything else. I'd distinguish this from spam sent to the mailing list itself, which is obviously different. Is there anything further that could be done to prevent this? -- Dave

...omes down to mainly *1*, i.e., me. > > I was expecting, given the strongly worded language about "just use > lucene/SOLR" and "ignore squat", that I should invest time + effort into this > JAVA nightmare that is SOLR. > > I started with squat and another word-indexor system that used out-of-band > (not a dovecot plugin) software to provide rapid (sub-second) searches through > tens-of-GB-scale mailboxes. > > Unlike what I was led to believe, the squat indexes worked surprisingly well, > once you sorted out the odd resource size (ulimit-related)...

...me. > > > > I was expecting, given the strongly worded language about "just use > > lucene/SOLR" and "ignore squat", that I should invest time + effort into this > > JAVA nightmare that is SOLR. > > > > I started with squat and another word-indexor system that used out-of-band > > (not a dovecot plugin) software to provide rapid (sub-second) searches through > > tens-of-GB-scale mailboxes. > > > > Unlike what I was led to believe, the squat indexes worked surprisingly well, > > once you sorted out the odd resour...

...out "just > > > > use > > > > lucene/SOLR" and "ignore squat", that I should invest time + > > > > effort into this > > > > JAVA nightmare that is SOLR. > > > > > > > > I started with squat and another word-indexor system that used > > > > out-of-band > > > > (not a dovecot plugin) software to provide rapid (sub-second) > > > > searches through > > > > tens-of-GB-scale mailboxes. > > > > > > > > Unlike what I was led to believe, the squa...

...e anything further that could be done to prevent this? It's practically impossible to "police" all of those who sign up for a mailing list that they do so for honest or constructive intentions. In addition, copies of this mailing list are archived by various online search engines and indexors, from content maintained or published by the list operators. You're already using unique mail addresses, which is a sensible strategy, and one I use myself. In fact, I use a scheme whereby I don't need to change or update any back-end settings to deal with a multitude of unique and ad-hoc...

...ould be done to prevent this? > > It's practically impossible to "police" all of those who sign up for a mailing > list that they do so for honest or constructive intentions. In addition, > copies of this mailing list are archived by various online search engines and > indexors, from content maintained or published by the list operators. > > You're already using unique mail addresses, which is a sensible strategy, and > one I use myself. In fact, I use a scheme whereby I don't need to change or > update any back-end settings to deal with a multitude...

...his? > > > > It's practically impossible to "police" all of those who sign up for a mailing > > list that they do so for honest or constructive intentions. In addition, > > copies of this mailing list are archived by various online search engines and > > indexors, from content maintained or published by the list operators. > > > > You're already using unique mail addresses, which is a sensible strategy, and > > one I use myself. In fact, I use a scheme whereby I don't need to change or > > update any back-end settings to de...

...dget and manpower level that comes down to mainly *1*, i.e., me. I was expecting, given the strongly worded language about "just use lucene/SOLR" and "ignore squat", that I should invest time + effort into this JAVA nightmare that is SOLR. I started with squat and another word-indexor system that used out-of-band (not a dovecot plugin) software to provide rapid (sub-second) searches through tens-of-GB-scale mailboxes. Unlike what I was led to believe, the squat indexes worked surprisingly well, once you sorted out the odd resource size (ulimit-related) issues (vsz & friends...

...omes down to mainly *1*, i.e., me. > > I was expecting, given the strongly worded language about "just use > lucene/SOLR" and "ignore squat", that I should invest time + effort into this > JAVA nightmare that is SOLR. > > I started with squat and another word-indexor system that used out-of-band > (not a dovecot plugin) software to provide rapid (sub-second) searches through > tens-of-GB-scale mailboxes. > > Unlike what I was led to believe, the squat indexes worked surprisingly well, > once you sorted out the odd resource size (ulimit-related)...

The real main differecne seems coming from "diffconfig.xml" When I put yours, Solr delete (!) schema.xml and create a "manage-schema" and starts complaining about useless types (tdates, booleans, etc..) that are not needed for Mail fileds When I put mine (from standard distribution of Arch), it keeps things as they are (yeah !), does not complains about those useless types

...omes down to mainly *1*, i.e., me. > > I was expecting, given the strongly worded language about "just use > lucene/SOLR" and "ignore squat", that I should invest time + effort into this > JAVA nightmare that is SOLR. > > I started with squat and another word-indexor system that used out-of-band > (not a dovecot plugin) software to provide rapid (sub-second) searches through > tens-of-GB-scale mailboxes. > > Unlike what I was led to believe, the squat indexes worked surprisingly well, > once you sorted out the odd resource size (ulimit-related)...

...omes down to mainly *1*, i.e., me. > > I was expecting, given the strongly worded language about "just use > lucene/SOLR" and "ignore squat", that I should invest time + effort into this > JAVA nightmare that is SOLR. > > I started with squat and another word-indexor system that used out-of-band > (not a dovecot plugin) software to provide rapid (sub-second) searches through > tens-of-GB-scale mailboxes. > > Unlike what I was led to believe, the squat indexes worked surprisingly well, > once you sorted out the odd resource size (ulimit-related)...

Hi all, I searched the archives for a solution to this issue but didn't find any thing. I have an office with a mix of PCs running ME and XP that use Samba 2.2.7 under RH Linux 7.3 as an archive for mortgage information. When documents are moved to the Samba share, the file creation timestamp on the Linux box reflects the time the files were created on the PCs. What I need is for the