sorry about that - it was early in the morning...
my guess is that the analyzer you are passing to queryparser lowercases
"POST" but doesn't "POST*" or "POST?". could you try seeing the values
of your query when it is going to the searcher?

-----Original Message-----
From: karl �ie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 8:22 AM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Problems with exact matces on non-tokenized fields...


Hm.. a misunderstanding: i don't create the field with the value 
"POST?" i create it with "POST". "element:POST?" or "element:POST*" are 
the strings i send to the QueryParser for searching.

mvh Karl �ie

On torsdag, sep 26, 2002, at 14:13 Europe/Oslo, Alex Murzaku wrote:

> But indeed "POST" does not match to "POST?". If you are not tokenizing

> the field, the character "?" remains there together with everything 
> else.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: karl �ie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 7:50 AM
> To: Lucene Users List
> Subject: Problems with exact matces on non-tokenized fields...
>
>
> Hi, i have a problem with getting a exact match on a non-tokenized 
> field.
>
> I have a Lucene Document with a field named "element" which is stored 
> and indexed but not tokenized. The value of the field is "POST" 
> (uppercase). But the only way i can match the field is by entering 
> "element:POST?" or "element:POST*" in the QueryParser class.
>
> Have anyone here run into this problem?
>
> I am using the 1.2 release version of Lucene.
>
> Mvh Karl �ie
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to