Hi Ronald, Caveat - I haven't tested this, but:
With a RegexQuery <http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_3_2/api/org/apache/lucene/search/regex/RegexQuery.html>, I think you can do something like (using your example): +abc*123 -{Regex}(?!abc.*123$) This query would include all documents that have terms that match the wildcard "abc*123", and exclude all documents containing terms that don't match regex "^abc.*123$". Note that the Lucene QueryParser doesn't handle regex queries (and if it did, the syntax would probably be different than "{Regex}" - this was intended solely for purposes of exposition). As a result, you would have to manually construct the RegexQuery and combine it using BooleanQuery clauses with your wildcard query. The "(?!...)" syntax is a negative lookahead assertion - this is a Java 1.4+ java.util.regex.Pattern feature. Note that wildcard expressions are easily programmatically converted to regular expressions by substituting "*"->".*" and "?"->".", and then adding the "$" anchor. The "^" anchor is not required with RegexQuery's, because when using the java.util.regex engine (the default engine), j.u.r.Matcher.lookingAt() is used; from <http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/java/util/regex/Matcher.html#lookingAt()>: Attempts to match the input sequence, starting at the beginning, against the pattern. Like the matches method, this method always starts at the beginning of the input sequence; unlike that method, it does not require that the entire input sequence be matched. Caveat #2: RegexQuery's are relatively slow, since *all* index terms have to be tested against the regular expression, so you may have to use some other method if query response time turns out to be a problem. Steve On 07/20/2008 at 8:29 AM, Ronald Rudy wrote: > A query solution is preferable.. but I can programmatically > filter my results after the fact, it just seems like something that > the Lucene team should consider adding.. I think it would only have > value for wildcard queries, but nonetheless it would have some value > I think.. > > -Ron > > On Jul 18, 2008, at 6:24 PM, eks dev wrote: > > > Analyzer that detects your condition "ALL match something", if > > possible at all... > > e.g. "800123456 80034543534 80023423423" -> 800 > > > > than you put it in ALL_MATCH field and match this condition against > > it... if this prefix needs to be variable, you could extract all > > matching prefixes to this fiield an make your query work like > > "ALL_MATCH:800" and care not for the rest :) than yo would not need > > field1 at all for these queries > > > > you were looking for something like this or you need "Query solution"? > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > > From: Chris Hostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org > > > Sent: Saturday, 19 July, 2008 12:00:39 AM > > > Subject: Re: Boolean expression for no terms OR matching a wildcard > > > > > > > Maybe this is easier ... suppose what I'm indexing is a phone number, > > > > and there are multiple phone numbers for what I'm indexing under the > > > > same field (phone) and I want the wildcard query to match only > > > > records that have either no phone numbers at all OR where ALL phone > > > > numbers are in a specific area code (e.g. 800* would match all in the > > > > 800 area code). > > > > > > i can't think of anyway to accomplish the second part of your query. > > > specificly, given the following records... > > > > > > Doc1: field1:AAA, field1:Aaa, field1:Bb, field1:C, field2:X, field3:Y > > > Doc2: field1:AAA, field1:Aaa, field1:Aa, field2:Z > > > > > > ...i can't think of any type of query like field1:A* which would match > > > Doc2 but not Doc1 (because there are other field1 values that do > > > not start with 'A') > > > > > > -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
