[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1768?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14320767#comment-14320767
]
Michael Osipov commented on LUCENE-1768:
----------------------------------------
Though this is old and Lucene 3.x is not supported anymore, We have found a bug
in our old indexing service cause by the {{RangeQueryNode}}. It has been
incorrectly implemented back in 3.4. The logic is reversed compared to the fix
in 4.0 thus making it unusable.
That is the logic in 3.x:
{code}
super(lower, upper, lower.getOperator() == CompareOperator.LE, upper
.getOperator() == CompareOperator.GE);
{code}
and the logic in 4.x:
{code}
return new TermRangeQueryNode(lower, upper,
lower.getOperator() == CompareOperator.GE,
upper.getOperator() == CompareOperator.LE);
{code}
> NumericRange support for new query parser
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1768
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1768
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: core/queryparser
> Affects Versions: 2.9
> Reporter: Uwe Schindler
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Labels: contrib, gsoc, gsoc2011, lucene-gsoc-11, mentor
> Fix For: 3.4, 4.0-ALPHA
>
> Attachments: TestNumericQueryParser-fix.patch,
> TestNumericQueryParser-fix.patch, TestNumericQueryParser-fix.patch,
> TestNumericQueryParser-fix.patch, week-14.patch, week-7.patch, week-8.patch,
> week1.patch, week11-13_for_lucene_3x.patch, week11-13_for_lucene_3x.patch,
> week15_for_lucene_3x.patch, week15_for_trunk.patch, week2.patch, week3.patch,
> week4.patch, week5-6.patch
>
>
> It would be good to specify some type of "schema" for the query parser in
> future, to automatically create NumericRangeQuery for different numeric
> types? It would then be possible to index a numeric value
> (double,float,long,int) using NumericField and then the query parser knows,
> which type of field this is and so it correctly creates a NumericRangeQuery
> for strings like "[1.567..*]" or "(1.787..19.5]".
> There is currently no way to extract if a field is numeric from the index, so
> the user will have to configure the FieldConfig objects in the ConfigHandler.
> But if this is done, it will not be that difficult to implement the rest.
> The only difference between the current handling of RangeQuery is then the
> instantiation of the correct Query type and conversion of the entered numeric
> values (simple Number.valueOf(...) cast of the user entered numbers).
> Evenerything else is identical, NumericRangeQuery also supports the MTQ
> rewrite modes (as it is a MTQ).
> Another thing is a change in Date semantics. There are some strange flags in
> the current parser that tells it how to handle dates.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
