I was hoping to avoid the overhead of encoding/decoding, but it looks like I'll have to do that :(
While on the topic, I noticed in the Field class that we have a "isBinary" boolean flag, however this always gets set to false in the constructors as well as the default value, and I can't even see a usage of this flag at write-time. What's the point of this flag, a feature for binary fields that was never implemented? I'm talking about the latest sources now, by the way, 1.9.something. Fredrik On 9/26/05, Koji Sekiguchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You can encode (e.g. base64) the binary data to get a String > and store the String. > > Koji > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Fredrik Andersson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 6:31 PM > > To: general@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: Binary fields in index > > > > > > Hello Gang! > > > > Is there any trick, or undocumented way, to store binary (unindexed, > > untokenized) data in a Lucene Field? All the Field > > constructors just deal > > with Strings. I'm currently using another database to store > > binary data, but > > it would be very neat, and more efficient, to store it > > directly in Lucene. > > > > Thanks in advance, > > Fredrik > > > > >
