On 8/12/06, Bill Lovett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm creating a search that allows results to be sorted in different > ways. In defining the sortable fields, I was careful to use untokenized > indexes. Everything was working great except for one field-- it refused > to sort properly, even though all the others were fine. > > It seems as if the presence of empty strings in my data were to blame. > By setting them to a default value, sorting on that field suddenly > worked fine. Why is that? The same failure happened when I changed the > empty strings to nulls. > > Do I always have to check for empty strings or nulls when defining sort > fields?
Hi Bill, This is a bug which has sort of been fixed in the latest version. I say sort of because the solution is not really ideal. For integer or float fields the default value is set to 0. Ideally, I think undefined values should come after defined values no matter what the order but this is a little harder to do with the current implementation. It works for string fields but not for integer and float fields. Cheers, Dave _______________________________________________ Ferret-talk mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ferret-talk
