My problem is as follows: Let's say I have three files. A, B, and C. Each of these files contains 100-150M strings (one per line). Each string is in the format of a hierarchical path like /e/d/f. For example:
File A (RTL):
/arbiter/par0/unit1/sigA
/arbiter/par0/unit1/sigB
...
/arbiter/par0/unit2/sigA
File B (SCH)
/arbiter_sch/par0/unit1/sigA
/arbiter_sch/par0/unit1/sigB
...
/arbiter_sch/par0/unit2/sigA
File C (Layout)
/top/arbiter/par0/unit1/sigA
/top/arbiter/par0/unit1/sigB
...
/top/arbiter/par0/unit2/sigA
We can think of file A corresponding to circuit signals in a hardware modeling language. File B corresponding to circuit signals in a schematic netlist. File C corresponding to circuit signals in a layout (for manufacturing).
Now a signal will have a mapping between File A <-> File B <-> File C. For example in this case, /arbiter/par0/unit1/sigA == /arbiter_sch/par0/unit1/sigA == /top/arbiter/par0/unit1/sigA. Of course, this association (equivalence) is established by me, and I don't expect the matcher to figure this out for me.
Now say, I give '/arbiter/par0/unit1/sigA'. In this case, the matcher should return a direct match from file A since it is found. For file B/C a direct match is not possible. So it should return the best possible matches (i.e., edit distance?) So in this example, it can give /arbiter_sch/par0/unit1/sigA from file B and /top/arbiter/par0/unit1/sigA from file C.
Instead of giving a full string search, I could also give something like *par0*unit1*sigA and it should give me all the possible matches from fileA/B/C.
I am looking for solutions, and came across Apache Lucene. However, I am not totally sure if this would work. I am going through the docs to get some idea.
My main requirements are the following:
There will be 3 text files with full path to signals. (I can adjust the format to make it more compact if it helps building the indexer more quickly).
Building the index should be fairly fast (take a couple of hours). The files above are static (no modifications).
Searching should be comprehensive. It is OK if it takes ~1s / search but the matching should support direct match, regex match, and edit distance matching. The main challenge is each file can have 100-150 million signals.
Can someone tell me if such a use case can be easily addressed by Lucene? What would be the correct way to go about building a index and doing quick/fast searching? I would like to write some proof-of-concept code and test the performance. Thanks.
i think based on your requirements the best solution would be a PoC with a given test set of entries. Based on this it should be possible to evaluate the target indexing time you like to achieve. Because you only use static informations it's easier, because do don't have to care about topics like NRT (near-real-time searches).
Personally i never used lucene for such a big information set but i think lucene is able to handle this.
How i would do it:
Read tutorials and best practices about lucene, indexing, searching and understand how it works
Define an data set for indexing lets say 1000 lines for each file
Define your lucene document structure
this is really important because based on this you will apply your
searches. take care about analyzer tasks like tokanization if needed
and how. If you need fulltext search care about a TextField.
Write code for simple indexing
Run small tests with indexing and inspect your index with Luke
Write code for simple searching
Define queries and your expected results. execute searches and check
results.
Try to structure your code. separate indexing and searching -> it will be easier to refactor.
I am using solr 4.10. I have to index poetry data in solr. Now what should be the document structure. Basically, I want to give a search facility for a term in poem. Only that specific distich should be given back. Now should I index complete poem in single document or one document per distich. I know some poems have two lines for single concept and some 4 etc. Now What should be its storing format ?
Index the distiches individually and link them through a poem identifier and a sequence id. That way you can also retrieve the distich before or after - or the whole poem.
If there's certain use cases that need to treat the poems as a whole instead, create a separate collection and index to both collections. That way you can adjust and tweak the search results as you need, depending on the use case.
I have a ETL which give text file output and I have to check the those text content has the word error or bad using pentaho.
Is there any simple way to find it?
If you are trying to process a number of files, you can use a Get Filenames step to get all the filenames. Then, if your text files are small, you can use a Get File Content step to get the whole file as one row, then use a Java Filter or other matching step (RegEx, e.g.) to search for the words.
If your text files are too big but line-based or otherwise in a fixed format (which it likely is if you used a text file output step), you can use a Text File Input step to get the lines, then a matcher step (see above) to find the words in the line. Then you can use a Filter Rows step to choose just those rows that contain the words, then Select Values to choose just the filename, then a Sort Rows on the filename, then a Unique Rows step. The result should be a list of filenames whose contents contain the search words.
This may seem like a lot of steps, but Pentaho Data Integration or PDI (aka Kettle) is designed to be a flow of steps with distinct (and very reusable) functionality. A smaller but less "PDI" method is to write a User Defined Java Class (or other scripting) step to do all the work. This solution has a smaller number of steps but is not very configurable or reusable.
If you're writing these files out yourself, then dont you already know the content? So scan the fields at the point at which you already have them in memory.
If you're trying to see if Pentaho has written an error to the file, then you should use error handling on the output step.
Finally PDI is not a text searching tool. If you really need to do this, then probably best bet is good old grep..
I am using Lucene in android to search my content. I have two types of documents and one has a trashed field which is either true or false. The other type of document does not have that field. I want to return all documents that have trashed:false, or don't have the trashed field.
I have tried add -trashed:true to my query, which returns all the correct documents, but it messes up the offsets of the search surround a different word and not the one I am searching for.
EDIT:
I have to add this to every search query I perform. I have an index of approximately 20,000 documents and I would really like to not have to rebuild it because I had my users rebuild their indices my last release. Note: this is on android devices so it takes a long time and a lot of battery to reindex all of their documents.
Thanks for the help.
I can think of following solution.
1) If you can rebuild the index.
Add trashed:na field-value to the docs for which "trashed" is not applicable.
To get all the docs with trashed:false or "trashed" is not applicable, you can use following..
Query: trashed:false OR trashed:na
2) If you cannot rebuild the index, I am not sure...
In software engineering we create indexes all the time (e.g., in databases) but I also hear a lot of people talk about inverted indices. Is there something fundamentally different between the two? They sound like the same thing.
One common use is "...to allow fast full-text searching."
The two types denote directionality. One takes you forward through the index, and the other takes you backward (the inverse) through the index. That's it. There's no mystery to uncover here. Otherwise the two types are identical, it's just a question of what information you have, and as a result what information you're trying to find.
To address your inquiry, I don't think there's actually a way to know why the use is what it is today. The only reason it's important to define which is forward and which one is inverted is so that we can all have a conversation about them, and everyone knows which direction we're talking about. Think about the terms "left" and "right": they are relative. Which is which doesn't matter, except that everyone needs to agree which one is "left" and which one is "right" in order for the words to have meaning. If, as a culture, we decided to flip left and right, then you'd have the same issue figuring out what a "right turn" vs a "left turn" is since the agreed upon meaning had changed. However, the naming is arbitrary, so which one is which (in and of itself) doesn't matter - what matters is that we all agree on the meaning.
In your comment where you ask, "please don't just define the terms", you're missing the point, and I think you're just getting hung up on the wording when there is absolutely no difference between them.
For the benefit of future readers, I will now provide several "forward" and "inverted" index examples:
Example 1: Web search
If you're thinking that the inverse of an index is something like the inverse of a function in mathematics, where the inverse is a special thing that has a different form, then you're mistaken: that's not the case here.
In a search engine you have a list of documents (pages on web sites), where you enter some keywords and get results back.
A forward index (or just index) is the list of documents, and which words appear in them. In the web search example, Google crawls the web, building the list of documents, figuring out which words appear in each page.
The inverted index is the list of words, and the documents in which they appear. In the web search example, you provide the list of words (your search query), and Google produces the documents (search result links).
They are both indexes - it's just a question of which direction you're going. Forward is from documents->to->words, inverted is from words->to->documents.
Example 2: DNS
Another example is a DNS lookup (which takes a host name, and returns an IP address) and a reverse lookup (which takes an IP address, and gives you the host name).
Example 3: A book
The index in the back of a book is actually an inverted index, as defined by the examples above - a list of words, and where to find them in the book. In a book, the table of contents is like a forward index: it's a list of documents (chapters) which the book contains, except instead of listing the words in those sections, the table of contents just gives a name/general description of what's contained in those documents (chapters).
Example 4: Your cell phone
The forward index in your cell phone is your list of contacts, and which phone numbers (cell, home, work) are associated with those contacts. The inverted index is what allows you to manually enter a phone number, and when you hit "dial" you see the person's name, rather than the number, because your phone has taken the phone number and found you the contact associated with it.
They called it inverted just because there is already a forward index. Take the example of search engine, it composed by two parts: the first part is "web crawler and parser" which build a index from document to word, the second part is search database which build a index from word to document. Because of the first index exist, we naturally call the second index as inverted index.
If you name the TOC (Table of Content) of a book as index, then you should call the index at the end of book as "inverted index". Or, in other side, you can call the TOC as inverted index.
typically when speaking about index, you mean some added calculations or stored results of procedures which have been done in order to speed up application (e.g. MySQL or other RDBMS Consult MySQL the docs). Indexing can also be related to caching etc.
Inverted index creates file with structure that is primarily intender for (fulltext) searching.
Inverted index consists of two main files:
Vocabulary
Occurences
In vocabulary are common words extracted from text (of course after filtering blacklist words like pronouns). The occurences file holds the connection between words and documents (word1 appears in doc1 and doc2, not in doc3). It is represented in a form of a matrix.
In the above image is shown the process of creating the two files mentioned.
If you are further interester in this problematic I can recommend you a great book written by Ricardo Yated - Modern Information Retrieval (See it on Amazon) - about page 200 I think.
Hope it helps :-)
normalocity has already wonderfully differentiated between a forward and an inverted index but for the question of why one is called a forward index and the other an inverted index, maybe this is why they are called that way---
Taking example of search engine crawling and indexing (or building index for a book), a forward index can be built simultaneously while you are crawling the web pages(or reading the book) or going forward. So if you have 10 webpages to crawl(or 10 chapters in a book) you can crawl the first webpage(read the first chapter) and then make a list of words which appear in the webpage(words which appear in the chapter) and continue this process for other webpages(other chapters) so by the time you have crawled all the 10 webpages(read all 10 chapters) your forward index is complete with each webpage(chapter) pointing to a list of words it contains.
But to make an inverted index you have to crawl all the 10 webpages(read the 10 chapters) and and then take each word from each documents list and figure out which documents contain that word. So this is like going backward once you have crawled the webpages(read chapters of the book). So its called an inverted index.
This is just my speculation.
The term "Inverted Word Index" refers to the change in relationship of
a single-document containing many-words, to each unique word containing
(or identifying) a list of many-documents. This is effectively taking a One-to-Many Relationship (Docs to Words) and Inverting (or reversing) it such that a new "Inverted" One-to-Many Relationship now exists, which is each-unique-word relating to Many-Documents (i.e., all that contain that word). It's origin really is that simple, and the term "inverted index" was used to describe manual indexes of the same type long before computers and electronic high-speed indexing even existed (yes, admittedly, I'm an old, geezer programmer, almost old enough to have considered Grace Hopper a "sweet young lady" age appropriate for courting back when COBOL was a shiny new language). Please don't discard us geezers just yet, as we may occasionally provide a useful, and possibly even valuable, historical tid-bit or two - when our personal RAM is still working, that is. [grin]
There are many types of index. For example, B-tree, R-tree, hash... For different purposes, we must choose correct index.
Inverted index is a special one. Inverted index usually used in full text search engine. Use inverted index we can find out a word's locate in a document(or documents set) as fast as possible. Think about the limit of memory and cpu, other index can't finish this job.
You can read lucene document for more details. It's a open source search engine. http://lucene.apache.org/java/docs/index.html
in inverted indexes, we have the following form:
word1-> list of docs it occurs in (sorted order)
word2-> list of docs it occurs in (sorted order)
It is very useful for search engine query processing as it allows us to find docs that word occurs in .
You can use supervised machine learing to build this inverted index.
One more difference:
Handling updates with the inverted index are expensive in comparison with forward index.
Forward index handles updates easily by reflecting the changes only in the corresponding document index, whereas in the inverted index, the same change has to reflect in multiple positions across the inverted index.