-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 867
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Full-search implementation concerns #661
Comments
Thanks for @evil-shrike 's comments, it's quite reasonable and insightful. I'm glad to share something with you:
Thanks @evil-shrike . Feel free to share it here if you have more concerns. |
sure, we have to build it - similar to that how it's built in runtime currently and only call |
If no |
I understand, I meant we don't need it at runtime (load a file from the server) if index would be built in built-time (with custom stopwords). |
We're experiencing isses with the second point. |
I'm trying to customize the search-stopwords.json so I can filter Italian stopwords (we are writing documentation in Italian), but without success. I tried to override the file inside my custom template and also to set the array directly inside search-worker.js, but apparently nothing happens and the index.json in the _site root is always huge. Could anybody explain my how I can do it? |
The performance of this runtime index processing isn't so good. The doc site I have has an It's mentioned above that it might be possible to do this processing at build time instead of runtime in the browser. If that is possible, does anyone know how i can achieve that? |
I would like to know how to go about this as well. We are concerned about processing large index.json files at runtime. Any updates on this? @qinezh |
Checking back in on build-time indexes. Our search takes over a minute for the idex to be built on most desktops. It looks like search is just broken, because users would give up before the index is created. |
If somebody is still eager for a solution, I wrote one for DocFx v2 where the index generation is moved to build-time. |
@Unnvaldr It is a year old now, how about a readme file explaining the features, limitations, etc, and for many, a license information? |
Project was private for that time, just recently decided to share it. Most of the stuff you specified will be added in the following days. |
Added a browser cache to speed up page load speed for subsequent visits. The first page view still builds the index in the browser and is slow. Multilanguage support require building index at build time since some languages like |
First of all full-search is awesome. Really cool. But let me criticize a bit.
lurn already contains built-in stopwords for English. But you remove default stopWordFilter, then load a separate stopwords index file and generate a filter based on it. Why?
That search-stopwords.json contains the same stopwords as default builtin filter!
Moreover lunr addons for languages (from https://github.com/MihaiValentin/lunr-languages) contains their own stop words.
$.getJSON("index.json", function (data) { engine = lunr.Index.load(data); })
That's all.
I understand that you enrich search results with title and keywords which are absent in
lunr.search
's result. But it can be done via additional index file.Index should be built with honor of other languages. lunr natively supports only English. For additional languages support we need to add addons (from https://github.com/MihaiValentin/lunr-languages):
in buildtime:
in runtime:
I can create a template for customization of index building but I think it should possible without template customization. Also please see #650 - these're problems with encoding of extracted keywords for indexing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: