But i feel very confused about this design: if i can search by some
indexable field, means there should be some terms stored somewhere, so i
should be able to get these terms as a Dictionary?
Lucene docs says it uses the same field name for 2 kinds of index data
store when set Store.YES, it seems treating them the same, here i have to
make 2 field names to compat the confusing and inner-conflicting design...
Mikhail Khludnev <m...@apache.org> 于2019年12月27日周五 下午5:05写道：
> Hello,
> It's by design: StringFields are searchable and filled by analysis output,
> StoredFields are returned input values.
> That's it.
>
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 11:32 AM 小鱼儿 <ctengc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have a document `category` field, which is a "|,;" separator separated
> > string, in indexing phase, i do manually split the value into atomic
> terms
> > and index as StringField, & i also add a same name StoredField which
> > contains original value form:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *List<String> terms = analyzer.analysis((String)fieldValue); for(String
> > term: terms) { doc.add(new StringField(fieldName, term, Store.NO));
> > }doc.add(new StoredField(fieldName, (String)fieldValue));*
> >
> > Then i use Suggest API to load this field's all terms:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > * Set<String> terms = new HashSet<String>();
> > DocumentDictionary dict = new DocumentDictionary(this.indexReader,
> > fieldName, null); InputIterator it; try { it =
> > dict.getEntryIterator(); // BytesRef byteRef =
> null;
> > while((byteRef = it.next()) != null){ String
> term
> > = byteRef.utf8ToString(); terms.add(term); }
> > } catch (IOException e) { e.printStackTrace();
> > log.error(e.getMessage(), e); }*
> >
> > To my supprise, terms seems only returning the STORED value, which is the
> > original value form, but i expect they should be the terms i put in each
> > StringField!
> >
> > Is this a design miss or impl. limit?
> >
>
>
> --
> Sincerely yours
> Mikhail Khludnev
>
