Search Results

Search found 1124 results on 45 pages for 'indexing'.

Page 15/45 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • SQL Server CONTAINS with digits gives no results

    - by dale
    Hi, I have a database table which is full-text indexed and i use the CONTAINS-function to perform a search-query on it. When I do: SELECT * FROM Plants WHERE CONTAINS(Plants.Description, '"Plant*" AND "one*"'); I get back all correct results matching a description with the words "Plant" and "one". Some plant are named like "Plant 1", "Plant 2" etc. and this is the problem. When i do this, i get no results: SELECT * FROM Plants WHERE CONTAINS(Plants.Description, '"Plant*" AND "1*"'); Anyone know why?

    Read the article

  • Typecast to an int in Octave/Matlab

    - by Leif Andersen
    I need to call the index of a matrix made using the linspace command, and based on somde data taken from an oscilloscope. Because of this, the data inputed is a double. However, I can't really call: Time[V0Found] where V0Found is something like 5.2 however, taking index 5 is close enough, so I need to drop the decimal. I used this equation to drop the decimal: V0FoundDec = V0Found - mod(V0Found,1) Time[V0FoundDec] However, eve though that drops the decimal, octave still complains about it. So, what can I do to typecast it to an int? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Covering Index versus Clustered Index (Database Index)

    - by Mestika
    Hi, I'm working on a database system and it's indexes, but I'm having a really hard time seing the clear difference between a covering index and a clustered index. I've googled my way around but hasn't got a clear cut answer on: What is the differences between the two types of indexes When do I use Covering index and when do I use Clustered index. I hope someone can explain it to me in a almost children-like answer :-) Sincerely Mestika By the way, I'm using IBM DB2 version 9.7

    Read the article

  • How-to index arrays (tags) in CouchDB using couchdb-lucene

    - by Lucas
    The setup: I have a project that is using CouchDB. The documents will have a field called "tags". This "tags" field is an array of strings (e.g., "tags":["tag1","tag2","etc"]). I am using couchdb-lucene as my search provider. The question: What function can be used to get couchdb-lucene to index the elements of "tags"? If you have an idea but no test environment, type it out, I'll try it and give the result here.

    Read the article

  • SolrException: Internal Server Error

    - by Priya
    Hi All, I am working on Solr in my application. I am using apache-solr-solrj-1.4.0.jar When I try to call add(SolrInputDocument doc) of CommonsHttpSolrServer I am getting following exception: org.apache.solr.common.SolrException: Internal Server Error Internal Server Error at org.apache.solr.client.solrj.impl.CommonsHttpSolrServer.request(CommonsHttpSolrServer.java:424) at org.apache.solr.client.solrj.impl.CommonsHttpSolrServer.request(CommonsHttpSolrServer.java:243) at org.apache.solr.client.solrj.request.AbstractUpdateRequest.process(AbstractUpdateRequest.java:105) at org.apache.solr.client.solrj.SolrServer.add(SolrServer.java:64) Can anyone please help me to resolve this problem? following are attributes in solrconfig.xml: native false true

    Read the article

  • Createing a new Index in SQL when current records don't meet that index

    - by Jonathan
    Hey all- I'd like to add an index to a table that already contains data. I know that there a few records currently in the table that are not unique with this new index. Clearly, MySQL won't let me add the index until all of them are. I need a query to identify the rows which currently have the same index. I can then delete or modify these rows as necessary. The new index contains 6 fields. Thanks- Jonathan

    Read the article

  • Adding # & search sign to TableIndex in UITableView

    - by sagar
    In iPhone native Phone book - there is a search character at the top & # character at the bottom. I want to add both of that character in my table Index. Currently I have implemented following code. atoz=[[NSMutableArray alloc] init]; for(int i=0;i<26;i++){ [atoz addObject:[NSString stringWithFormat:@"%c",i+65]]; } - (NSArray *)sectionIndexTitlesForTableView:(UITableView *)tableView{ return atoz; } How to have # character & search symbol in my UITableView? Thanks in advance for sharing your knowledge. Sagar

    Read the article

  • What Algorithm will Find New Longtail Keywords for *keyword* in PPC

    - by Becci
    I am looking for the algorithm (or combo) that would allow someone to find new longtail PPC search phrases based on say one corekeyword. Eg #1 word word corekeyword eg #2 word corekeyword word Google search tool allows a limited number vertically - mostly of eg#1 (https://adwords.google.com.au/select/KeywordToolExternal) I also know of other PPC apps that allow more volume than google adwords keyword tool, But I want to find other combos that mention the corekeyword & then naturally sort for the highest volume searched. Working example of exact match: corekeyword: copywriter (40,500 searches a month) google will serve up: become a copywriter (480 searches globally/month in english) But if I specifically look up: How to become a copywriter (720 searches a month) This exact longtail keyword phrase has 300 more searches than the 3 word version spat out by google. I want the algorithm to find any other highly search exact longtials like: how to become a copywriter Simply because it was save significant $ finding other longtail keywords after your campaign has been running an made google lots of money. I don't want a concantenation algorithm (I already have one of those), because hypothetically, I don't know what keywords will be that I want to find. Any gurus out there? Becci

    Read the article

  • MySQL index cardinality - performance vs storage efficiency

    - by Sean
    Say you have a MySQL 5.0 MyISAM table with 100 million rows, with one index (other than primary key) on two integer columns. From my admittedly poor understanding of B-tree structure, I believe that a lower cardinality means the storage efficiency of the index is better, because there are less parent nodes. Whereas a higher cardinality means less efficient storage, but faster read performance, because it has to navigate through less branches to get to whatever data it is looking for to narrow down the rows for the query. (Note - by "low" vs "high", I don't mean e.g. 1 million vs 99 million for a 100 million row table. I mean more like 90 million vs 95 million) Is my understanding correct? Related question - How does cardinality affect write performance?

    Read the article

  • PHP library for keeping your site Indexed by Google Bing etc

    - by Ole Jak
    I need some library which would be able to keep my urls Indexed and described. So I want to say to it something like Index this new url "www.bla-bla.com/new_url" with some key words or something like that. And I want to be soure that If I told my lib about my new URL Google and others will 100% find it As soon as possible and people will be able to find this URL on the web. Do you know any such libs?

    Read the article

  • Document Stored in File System Text Searching and Filtering required in ASP .Net Application

    - by Harryboy
    Hello Experts, We are building a jobsite application in which we will store resumes of all the candidates, which is planned to store on file system. Now We need to search inside that file and provide the result to the user, we need to provide that what is the best solution to implement text searching. I have just tried to identify it and got some reference like IFilter (API or interface) and Lucene.Net (open source), but not sure that is it a right solution. In initial phase it is expected to be around 50,000 resumes and it should be scalable enough if number increases. I just want some case study or some analysis or your suggestions that which is the best method to handle this requirement (Technology ASP .Net) Thanks

    Read the article

  • Fast search in XMl files in .NET (or How to index XML files)

    - by codymanix
    I have to implement a search feature which is able to quickly perform arbitrary complex queries to XML-data. If the user makes a query, all XML files must be searched to find possible matches. The users will have lots of XML-Files (a few 10000 or more) which are typically a few kilobytes in size. All the XML-files have almost the same structure. I already benchmarked XPath, it is too slow for my needs. How can it be done most efficiently? Is is possible to create indexes for the contents of the XML files (preserving content semantics, not just plain fulltext search)? Will it be useful to put the XML data into an (embedded) SQL database and do the queries with SQL? What other possibilities do I have?

    Read the article

  • Computing unique index for every poker starting hand

    - by Aly
    As there are 52 cards in a deck we know there are 52 choose 2 = 1326 distinct matchups, however in preflop poker this can be bucketed into 169 different hands such as AK offsuit and AK suited as whether it is A hearts K hearts or A spade K spades it makes no difference preflop. My question is, is there a nice mathematical property in which I can uniquely index each of these 169 hands (from 0 to 168 preferably). I am trying to create a look up table as a double[][] = new double [169][169] but have no way of changing a hand representation such as AKs (an Ace and a King of the same suit) to a unique index in this array.

    Read the article

  • mysql index optimization for a table with multiple indexes that index some of the same columns

    - by Sean
    I have a table that stores some basic data about visitor sessions on third party web sites. This is its structure: id, site_id, unixtime, unixtime_last, ip_address, uid There are four indexes: id, site_id/unixtime, site_id/ip_address, and site_id/uid There are many different types of ways that we query this table, and all of them are specific to the site_id. The index with unixtime is used to display the list of visitors for a given date or time range. The other two are used to find all visits from an IP address or a "uid" (a unique cookie value created for each visitor), as well as determining if this is a new visitor or a returning visitor. Obviously storing site_id inside 3 indexes is inefficient for both write speed and storage, but I see no way around it, since I need to be able to quickly query this data for a given specific site_id. Any ideas on making this more efficient? I don't really understand B-trees besides some very basic stuff, but it's more efficient to have the left-most column of an index be the one with the least variance - correct? Because I considered having the site_id being the second column of the index for both ip_address and uid but I think that would make the index less efficient since the IP and UID are going to vary more than the site ID will, because we only have about 8000 unique sites per database server, but millions of unique visitors across all ~8000 sites on a daily basis. I've also considered removing site_id from the IP and UID indexes completely, since the chances of the same visitor going to multiple sites that share the same database server are quite small, but in cases where this does happen, I fear it could be quite slow to determine if this is a new visitor to this site_id or not. The query would be something like: select id from sessions where uid = 'value' and site_id = 123 limit 1 ... so if this visitor had visited this site before, it would only need to find one row with this site_id before it stopped. This wouldn't be super fast necessarily, but acceptably fast. But say we have a site that gets 500,000 visitors a day, and a particular visitor loves this site and goes there 10 times a day. Now they happen to hit another site on the same database server for the first time. The above query could take quite a long time to search through all of the potentially thousands of rows for this UID, scattered all over the disk, since it wouldn't be finding one for this site ID. Any insight on making this as efficient as possible would be appreciated :) Update - this is a MyISAM table with MySQL 5.0. My concerns are both with performance as well as storage space. This table is both read and write heavy. If I had to choose between performance and storage, my biggest concern is performance - but both are important. We use memcached heavily in all areas of our service, but that's not an excuse to not care about the database design. I want the database to be as efficient as possible.

    Read the article

  • Having trouble using 'AND' in CONTAINSTABLE SQL SERVER FULL TEXT SEARCH

    - by Joshua
    I've been using FULL-TEXT for awhile but I cannot seem to get the most relevant results sometimes. If I have an field with something like "An Overview of Pain Medicine 5/12/2006" and a user types "An Overview 5/12/2006" So we create a search like: '"An" AND "Overview" AND "5/12/2006"' - 0 results (bad) '"Overview" AND "5/12/2006"' - 1 result (good) The CONTAINSTABLE portion of my query: FROM ce_Activity A INNER JOIN CONTAINSTABLE(View_Activities,(Searchable), @Search) AS KeyTbl ON A.ActivityID = KeyTbl.[KEY] "Searchable" is a field contains the activity title, and start date(converted to string) in one field so it's all search friendly. Why would this happen?

    Read the article

  • Full Text Index type column is empty

    - by RemotecUk
    I am trying to create an index on a VarBinary(max) field in my SQL Server 2008 database. The steps I am taking are as follows: Table: dbo.Records Right click on table and select "Full Text Index" Then select "Define Index..." I choose the primary key which is the PK of my table (field name Id, type UniqueIndentifier). I then get the screen with the options Available Columns, Language for Word Breaker and Type Column I select my VarBinary(max) field called Chart as the Available Column by ticking the box. I select "English" as the Language for Word Breaker field. Then... I try to select the Type Column but there are no entries in here. I cannot proceed by clicking "Next" until this column is populated. Why are there no entries in this column for selection and what should be in there? Note 1: The VarBinary(max) field is linked to a file group if that makes any difference. Note 2: Also noticed that in the table designer I cannot set the full text option on that same field to "Yes" - its permanently stuck on "No". Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Implementing full text search on iPhone?

    - by Nimrod
    I'm looking for suggestions on the best way to implement a full-text search on some static data on the iPhone. Basically I have an app that contains the offline version of a web site, about 50MB of text, and I'd like for users to be able to search for terms. I figure that I should somehow build an table of ("word", reference_to_file_containing_word) or something, put that into either Core Data or just sqlite, index the "word" column, then have the search facility search the table for search terms and take the intersection of the sets of results for the terms or something. That wouldn't allow people to search for phrases but it would be pretty easy and probably not too slow. I'd like to just use existing SDK features for this. Should I use Core Data or sqlite? Does anyone have any other ideas on how this could be done?

    Read the article

  • Lucene and Special Characters

    - by Brandon
    I am using Lucene.Net 2.0 to index some fields from a database table. One of the fields is a 'Name' field which allows special characters. When I perform a search, it does not find my document that contains a term with special characters. I index my field as such: Directory DALDirectory = FSDirectory.GetDirectory(@"C:\Indexes\Name", false); Analyzer analyzer = new StandardAnalyzer(); IndexWriter indexWriter = new IndexWriter(DALDirectory, analyzer, true, IndexWriter.MaxFieldLength.UNLIMITED); Document doc = new Document(); doc.Add(new Field("Name", "Test (Test)", Field.Store.YES, Field.Index.TOKENIZED)); indexWriter.AddDocument(doc); indexWriter.Optimize(); indexWriter.Close(); And I search doing the following: value = value.Trim().ToLower(); value = QueryParser.Escape(value); Query searchQuery = new TermQuery(new Term(field, value)); Searcher searcher = new IndexSearcher(DALDirectory); TopDocCollector collector = new TopDocCollector(searcher.MaxDoc()); searcher.Search(searchQuery, collector); ScoreDoc[] hits = collector.TopDocs().scoreDocs; If I perform a search for field as 'Name' and value as 'Test', it finds the document. If I perform the same search as 'Name' and value as 'Test (Test)', then it does not find the document. Even more strange, if I remove the QueryParser.Escape line do a search for a GUID (which, of course, contains hyphens) it finds documents where the GUID value matches, but performing the same search with the value as 'Test (Test)' still yields no results. I am unsure what I am doing wrong. I am using the QueryParser.Escape method to escape the special characters and am storing the field and searching by the Lucene.Net's examples. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Save a binary file in SQL Server as BLOB and text (or get the text from Full-Text index)

    - by Glennular
    Currently we are saving files (PDF, DOC) into the database as BLOB fields. I would like to be able to retrieve the raw text of the file to be able to manipulate it for hit-highlighting and other functions. Does anyone know of a simple way to either parse out the files and save the raw text on save, either via SQL or .net code. I have found that Adobe has a filtdump utility that will convert the PDF to text. Filtdump seems to be a command line tool, and i don't see a way to use a file stream. And what would the extractor be for Office documents and other file types? -or- Is there a way to pull out the raw text from the Full text index? Note i am trying to build a .net & MSSql solution without having to use a third party tool such as Lucene

    Read the article

  • Tables with no Primary Key

    - by Matt Hamilton
    I have several tables whose only unique data is a uniqueidentifier (a Guid) column. Because guids are non-sequential (and they're client-side generated so I can't use newsequentialid()), I have made a non-primary, non-clustered index on this ID field rather than giving the tables a clustered primary key. I'm wondering what the performance implications are for this approach. I've seen some people suggest that tables should have an auto-incrementing ("identity") int as a clustered primary key even if it doesn't have any meaning, as it means that the database engine itself can use that value to quickly look up a row instead of having to use a bookmark. My database is merge-replicated across a bunch of servers, so I've shied away from identity int columns as they're a bit hairy to get right in replication. What are your thoughts? Should tables have primary keys? Or is it ok to not have any clustered indexes if there are no sensible columns to index that way?

    Read the article

  • How to improve performance of non-scalar aggregations on denormalized tables

    - by The Lazy DBA
    Suppose we have a denormalized table with about 80 columns, and grows at the rate of ~10 million rows (about 5GB) per month. We currently have 3 1/2 years of data (~400M rows, ~200GB). We create a clustered index to best suit retrieving data from the table on the following columns that serve as our primary key... [FileDate] ASC, [Region] ASC, [KeyValue1] ASC, [KeyValue2] ASC ... because when we query the table, we always have the entire primary key. So these queries always result in clustered index seeks and are therefore very fast, and fragmentation is kept to a minimum. However, we do have a situation where we want to get the most recent FileDate for every Region, typically for reports, i.e. SELECT [Region] , MAX([FileDate]) AS [FileDate] FROM HugeTable GROUP BY [Region] The "best" solution I can come up to this is to create a non-clustered index on Region. Although it means an additional insert on the table during loads, the hit isn't minimal (we load 4 times per day, so fewer than 100,000 additional index inserts per load). Since the table is also partitioned by FileDate, results to our query come back quickly enough (200ms or so), and that result set is cached until the next load. However I'm guessing that someone with more data warehousing experience might have a solution that's more optimal, as this, for some reason, doesn't "feel right".

    Read the article

  • How to setup Lucene search for a B2B web app?

    - by Bill Paetzke
    Given: 5000 databases (spread out over 5 servers) 1 database per client (so you can infer there are 1000 clients) 2 to 2000 users per client (let's say avg is 100 users per client) Clients (databases) come and go every day (let's assume most remain for at least one year) Let's stay agnostic of language or sql brand, since Lucene (and Solr) have a breadth of support The Question: How would you setup Lucene search so that each client can only search within its database? How would you setup the index(es)? Would you need to add a filter to all search queries? If a client cancelled, how would you delete their (part of the) index? (this may be trivial--not sure yet) Possible Solutions: Make an index for each client (database) Pro: Search is faster (than one-index-for-all method). Indices are relative to the size of the client's data. Con: I'm not sure what this entails, nor do I know if this is beyond Lucene's scope. Have a single, gigantic index with a database_name field. Always include database_name as a filter. Pro: Not sure. Maybe good for tech support or billing dept to search all databases for info. Con: Search is slower (than index-per-client method). Flawed security if query filter removed. For Example: Joel Spolsky said in Podcast #11 that his hosted web app product, FogBugz On-Demand, uses Lucene. He has thousands of on-demand clients. And each client gets their own database. His situation is quite similar to mine. Although, he didn't elaborate on the setup (particularly indices); hence, the need for this question. One last thing: I would also accept an answer that uses Solr (the extension of Lucene). Perhaps it's better suited for this problem. Not sure.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >