Search Results

Search found 19742 results on 790 pages for 'search tree'.

Page 21/790 | < Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >

• B-Tree Revision

  - by stan

  Hi, If we are looking for line intersections (horizontal and vertical lines only) and we have n lines with half of them vertical and no intersections then Sorting the list of line end points on y value will take N log N using mergesort Each insert delete and search of our data structue (assuming its a b-tree) will be < log n so the total search time will be N log N What am i missing here, if the time to sort using mergesort takes a time of N log N and insert and delete takes a time of < log n are we dropping the constant factor to give an overal time of N log N. If not then how comes < log n goes missing in total ONotation run time? Thanks

  Read the article

• Select box is not working properly after including google custom search box in web page

  - by Vinay

  I have got a select box and google custom search box in a page, when i choose a option from select box and navigate away from the page and again if i come back to the same page the option will not be selected (violates the default functionality of select box), The code is below <script src="https://www.google.com/jsapi" type="text/javascript"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> google.load('search', '1', {language : 'en'}); google.setOnLoadCallback(function() { var customSearchControl = new google.search.CustomSearchControl('004920913350056953771:kpkclvhujzk'); customSearchControl.setResultSetSize(google.search.Search.FILTERED_CSE_RESULTSET); var options = new google.search.DrawOptions(); options.setAutoComplete(true); options.enableSearchboxOnly("<?=$homeurl?>my_results.php", "query"); customSearchControl.draw('cse-search-form', options); }, true); </script> <select multiple="yes"> <option>1</option> <option>2</option> </select> If i remove the custom search script, the select box selected option will be retained even after navigating away from the page. (default functionality) Its working fine in chrome, IE but not in Firefox. Is there any solution for this, so that select box must work fine even in the presence of search box, but the order must be same 1) Search box 2)Select Box

  Read the article

• Algorithms to find longest common prefix in a sliding window.

  - by nn

  Hi, I have written a Lempel Ziv compressor and decompressor. I am seeking to improve the time to search the dictionary for a phrase. I have considered K-M-P and Boyer-Moore, but I think an algorithm that adapts to changes in the dictionary would be faster. I've been reading that binary search trees (AVL or with splays) improve the performance of compression time considerably. What I fail to understand is how to bootstrap the binary search tree and insert/remove data. I'm not actually quite sure the significance of each node in the binary search. I am searching for phrases so will each character be considered a node? Also how and what is inserted/removed from the search tree as new data enters the dictionary and old data is removed? The binary search tree sounds like a good payoff since it can adapt to the dictionary, but I'm just not quite sure of how it's used.

  Read the article

• retrieving of coordinates from google search?

  - by cheesebunz

  Is there anyway of retrieving coordinates through google search? right now my search is able to have markers on the map, but however i do not have any idea how to retrieve coordinates through just the search api alone. I have a html page named mapsToolKit.html and two js scripts with maps.js and search.js, i want the coding to be in search.js, so far i have managed to done in the maps section but is there anyway to retrieve it back through the search.js part?

  Read the article

• How can I make keyword order more relevant in my search?

  - by Atomiton

  In my database, I have a keywords field that stores a comma-delimited list of keywords. For example, a Shrek doll might have the following keywords: ogre, green, plush, hero, boys' toys A "Beanie Baby" doll ( that happens to be an ogre ) might have: beanie baby, kids toys, beanbag toys, soft, infant, ogre (That's a completely contrived example.) What I'd like to do is if the consumer searches for "ogre" I'd like the "Shrek" doll to come up higher in the search results. My content administrator feels that if the keyword is earlier in the list, it should get a higher ranking. ( This makes sense to me and it makes it easy for me to let them control the search result relevance ). Here's a simplified query: SELECT p.ProductID AS ContentID , p.ProductName AS Title , p.ProductCode AS Subtitle , 100 AS Rank , p.ProductKeywords AS Keywords FROM Products AS p WHERE FREETEXT( p.ProductKeywords, @SearchPredicate ) I'm thinking something along the lines of replacing the RANK with: , 200 - INDEXOF(@SearchTerm) AS Rank This "should" rank the keyword results by their relevance I know INDEXOF isn't a SQL command... but it's something LIKE that I would like to accomplish. Am I approaching this the right way? Is it possible to do something like this? Does this make sense?

  Read the article

• Full Text Search like Google

  - by Eduardo

  I would like to implement full-text-search in my off-line (android) application to search the user generated list of notes. I would like it to behave just like Google (since most people are already used to querying to Google) My initial requirements are: Fast: like Google or as fast as possible, having 100000 documents with 200 hundred words each. Searching for two words should only return documents that contain both words (not just one word) (unless the OR operator is used) Case insensitive (aka: normalization): If I have the word 'Hello' and I search for 'hello' it should match. Diacritical mark insensitive: If I have the word 'así' a search for 'asi' should match. In Spanish, many people, incorrectly, either do not put diacritical marks or fail in correctly putting them. Stop word elimination: To not have a huge index meaningless words like 'and', 'the' or 'for' should not be indexed at all. Dictionary substitution (aka: stem words): Similar words should be indexed as one. For example, instances of 'hungrily' and 'hungry' should be replaced with 'hunger'. Phrase search: If I have the text 'Hello world!' a search of '"world hello"' should not match it but a search of '"hello world"' should match. Search all fields (in multifield documents) if no field specified (not just a default field) Auto-completion in search results while typing to give popular searches. (just like Google Suggest) How may I configure a full-text-search engine to behave as much as possible as Google? (I am mostly interested in Open Source, Java and in particular Lucene)

  Read the article

• Twitter Search API Question

  - by supermogx

  I'm using the twitter search API to get twitter posts based on some keywords, using AND and OR keyword. It works OK, but I seem to get problems using hashtags... For example : Not returning any results : http://search.twitter.com/search.json?q="%23ipad+AND+%23ipod"+OR+"%23joke+AND+%23funny"&rpp=100&callback=? Returning results : http://search.twitter.com/search.json?q="ipad+AND+ipod"+OR+"joke+AND+funny"&rpp=100&callback=? But there's results with #ipod AND #ipad because when I search only for #ipod, I can see a lot of posts with both hashtags. Example : http://search.twitter.com/search.json?q=%23ipad&rpp=100&callback=? P.S. %23 = # Any idea?

  Read the article

• Binary Search Tree Contains Function

  - by Suede

  I am trying to write a "contains" function for a binary search tree. I receive the following error at compile "Unhandled exception at 0x77291CB3 (ntdll.dll) in BST.exe: 0xC00000FD: Stack overflow (parameters: 0x00000001, 0x001E2FFC)." The following is my code. struct Node { int data; Node* leftChild; Node* rightChild; Node() : leftChild(NULL), rightChild(NULL) {} }; struct BST { Node* root; BST() : root(NULL) {} void insert(int value); bool contains(int value); }; void BST::insert(int value) { Node* temp = new Node(); temp->data = value; if(root == NULL) { root = temp; return; } Node* current; current = root; Node* parent; parent = root; current = (temp->data < current->data ? (current->leftChild) : (current->rightChild) while(current != NULL) { parent = current; current = (temp->data < current->data) ? (current->leftChild) : (current->rightChild) } if(temp->data < parent->data) { parent->leftChild = temp; } if(temp->data > parent->data) { parent->rightChild = temp; } } bool BST::contains(int value) { Node* temp = new Node(); temp->data = value; Node* current; current = root; if(temp->data == current->data) { // base case for when node with value is found std::cout << "true" << std::endl; return true; } if(current == NULL) { // base case if BST is empty or if a leaf is reached before value is found std::cout << "false" << std::endl; return false; } else { // recursive step current = (temp->data < current->data) ? (current->leftChild) : (current->rightChild); return contains(temp->data); } } int main() { BST bst; bst.insert(5); bst.contains(4); system("pause"); } As it stands, I would insert a single node with value '5' and I would search the binary search tree for a node with value '4' - thus, I would expect the result to be false.

  Read the article

• Outlook 2010 keeps losing the search index for emails

  - by Igor K

  Hoping someone can help here, this is driving me insane. Outlook 2010 keeps losing the search index so when I search for an email it has the yellow bar saying: search results may be incomplete because items are still being indexed Clicking on the bar says eg: 49200 items remaining to be indexed If it makes any difference, this is an IMAP account. If I leave Outlook open all day it will eventually index everything. But then say a week/month later it happens all again.

  Read the article

• Search inside of text files

  - by Matt

  So here is the situation. I currently run a mail server for my small non-profit company. My mail server (Merak Mail Server) keeps logs in .log files and mail as .tmp files. Essentially these are just text files that are kept on the server. Problem is that when I put text into the "Containing text" field on Windows Explorer, it always misses the files and tells me no results returned. Then when I search the files one by one (painful at best), I find the files I need. Do I not understand the search feature well enough, or maybe I have it indexing wrong. I really don't care what I need to use to search the files, even a third-party app is fine with me, I just want to type an email address into a box and search all of my log files or email files and find out which one I am looking for. It can be Windows Search or something else, as long as I can find a way to get the job done I will be happy. Pay solutions are fine as well. Thanks everyone in advance.

  Read the article

• Outlook Search Folder - Unread Mail in shared mailbox

  - by Garrett

  I have a user who is trying to configure the Unread Mail search folder for a shared mailbox in Outlook 2007. I believe last time we accomplished this by doing an advanced find, and saving the search. However, on this computer I can't search more than one folder of the shared mailbox at a time. Everything I have read online says this isn't possible, but we have one user who has it set up and working perfectly. There's no additional software or indexing, not even Windows Desktop Search 4.0 updates installed.

  Read the article

• How to reverse-i-search back and forth?

  - by m-ric

  I use reverse-i-search often, and that's cool. Sometime though when pressing Ctrl+r multiple times, I pass the command I am actually looking for. Because Ctrl+r searches backward in history, from newest to oldest, I have to: cancel, search again and stop exactly at the command, without passing it. While in reverse-i-search prompt, is it possible to search forward, i.e. from where I stand to newest. I naively tried Ctrl+shift+r, no luck. I heard about Ctrl+g but this is not what I am expecting here. Anyone has an idea?

  Read the article

• Search inside of text files

  - by Matt

  So here is the situation. I currently run a mail server for my small non-profit company. My mail server (Merak Mail Server) keeps logs in .log files and mail as .tmp files. Essentially these are just text files that are kept on the server. Problem is that when I put text into the "Containing text" field on Windows Explorer, it always misses the files and tells me no results returned. Then when I search the files one by one (painful at best), I find the files I need. Do I not understand the search feature well enough, or maybe I have it indexing wrong. I really don't care what I need to use to search the files, even a third-party app is fine with me, I just want to type an email address into a box and search all of my log files or email files and find out which one I am looking for. It can be Windows Search or something else, as long as I can find a way to get the job done I will be happy. Pay solutions are fine as well. Thanks everyone in advance.

  Read the article

• Lightweight outlook search

  - by Simon Johnson

  Does anybody know of a plugin for Outlook 2003 that makes the search fast and accurate? I tried using Microsoft Search and Google Desktop Search but I find that these product slow down my development machine too much. I heard of Lookout but it appears that Microsoft has pulled it.

  Read the article

• Can I search for HTML meta tags?

  - by Jim

  Is there a search engine that will allow me to search for specific HTML meta tag values?

  Read the article

• Firefox address bar search like chrome extension? [closed]

  - by Andrew

  Firefox address bar search like chrome extension?

  Read the article

• Is there a way to have a working search bar in Explorer with Windows Search Service disabled?

  - by Desmond Hume

  I had to disable Windows Search Service (turn it off in Windows Features) for the reason that it was constantly using the hard drive in an excessive way (maybe because I've got very large quantities of files on my PC), noticeably slowing down my computer, and the Windows.edb database file grew way too large, about 2.5 GB in size. But the side-effect of it is that now the search bar is gone from any Explorer window and I miss this useful feature. So my question is, is there a way to stop Windows Search Service torturing my hard drive and still being able to search for files and folders directly from Explorer, perhaps using some third-party software?

  Read the article

• Combine Windows 8 app and settings search?

  - by askvictor

  While I've adapted to most things in windows 8 quite easily, I miss the 'combined' search feature of win 7 where pressing Win then typing would bring up all of the applications, settings and files (not that I ever really used the files part). Now, if I want to search settings I press win, start typing, then have to press the down arrow twice, then enter, then find the setting I want (I know I could press win-w, but that's just another thing to remember). Is there any way to bring back the 'unified search'?

  Read the article

• Windows Search not searching in files

  - by Cylindric

  I am trying to get Windows Search to work on my Windows Server 2008 SP2 fileserver, so I can search in files for content. I have added the Windows Search Service role to the server, and using the right-click properties in Explorer set some folders to "Index this location". The problem is that neither on the server or remotely can I search in the files. I seem to get some inconsistencies in the GUIs, for example the "Indexing Options" panel shows me just 6 locations indexed, but if I click "Modify" I see nearly everything ticked. For example, the "SeachTest" folder under "infrastructure" has the "index this location" option ticked, but the "Projects" folder does not. I assume this is why some are grey and some not, but they are all ticked. T The "SearchTest" folder contains some files that have nothing but the text PurpleOrange in it, so I should be able to find those. So, to summarise: Which locations are indexed? The ones in the "Index these locations" list, the ones ticked, or the ones not greyed-out in the list? How do I get to the state where I can click in the search box and type PurpleOrange and see the files?

  Read the article

• Outlook 2010 search stopped working with Exchange 2007

  - by Steve Hiner

  The quick search feature in Outlook 2010 used to work fine. We switched the computers over from a workgroup so that they are on the domain with our new server. We then copied all the email from the old PST file into the new Exchange based folders. Since we did that 3 of the 4 computers can't search email using Outlook's awesome search boxes. One of them works perfectly fine. Any idea what might have happened? There are only 5 users on the network and it's a pretty burly server for such a small network, I can't imagine the server is still indexing their mail. Is the quick search something that has to be turned on or might it be related to the permissions change from a non-domain user to a standard domain user?

  Read the article

• How to Modify Windows 7 Search to Index Removable Drives

  - by AMissico

  I have over 8GB in my "Code Library" that I maintain on a 64GB "ScanDisk Ultra Backup USB Device". Windows Search 4.0 (installed on Windows XP) can index removable drives, but Windows 7 (which uses Windows Search 4.0) cannot because the USB device identifies itself as a "Removable" drive and Windows 7 refuses to index removable drives. How can I modify Windows 7 Search to index removable drives? All suggestions welcome and greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Building intranet search

  - by gmkv

  At work, we have lots of information squirreled away in many different sites -- wikis, product docs, ticketing system, etc -- many of which require authentication. I'm very interested in having a single way to search all our various silos, and in my spare time have looked at Nutch, Grub, Django + Haystack, etc. None of these is a complete solution a la Google Mini or Google Search Appliance. Has anybody built a basic intranet search engine out of a mixture of these tools? Would you have recommendations about how to go about it? I like Django, and Haystack seems to be a mildly popular search solution for it, but I'd need to wire up a crawler that can support crawling authenticated sites to it.

  Read the article

• Make thunderbird store all mail locally for IMAP accounts but not indexing all for search

  - by rubo77

  In Thunderbird the global gloda search is connected to the selection of downloaded/syncronized folders of the IMAP accounts in the Offline-settings. Is it possible somehow, that Thunderbirds download/syncs all emails in the IMAP account but does not add them to the index for the global search? I would like to do this because I have some accounts that I only keep in thunderbird for archiving reasons but I don't want to find those mails, when I use the global search

  Read the article

• Firefox - order of search engines reverts (toolbar)

  - by Victor78

  When I change the order of the search engines (Toolbar - Manage Search Engines - Move up / down - Ok) it changes the order, until I close and reopen the browser. I can't imagine that's the way it's supposed to work. I want it to stay in the order I select. I have no add-ons installed that have anything to do with search engines, nor that add any toolbars. I am not using a customized theme. Apparently this problem is rare, as Googling [ "manage search engine list" ("order reverts" OR "order changes") ] return 0 results. Firefox 3.6.12; Windows XP Pro SP3.

  Read the article

• Firefox - built in search engine toolbar broken

  - by Victor78

  When I change the order of the search engines (Toolbar - Manage Search Engines - Move up / down - Ok) it changes the order, until I close and reopen the browser. I can't imagine that's the way it's supposed to work. I want it to stay in the order I select. I have no add-ons installed that have anything to do with search engines, nor that add any toolbars. I am not using a customized theme. Apparently this problem is rare, as Googling [ "manage search engine list" ("order reverts" OR "order changes") ] return 0 results. Firefox 3.6.12; Windows XP Pro SP3.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28  | Next Page >