The main search query is equivalent in capabilities with the 'advanced' search. In fact I personally consider it the preferred way to search. See the examples

Also consider the below query how to use it:

a:pdf raw: @subject test email >>> out of office date1:2015.11.18 date2:2015.11.18


On 2021-05-02 20:44, Ryan Blenis wrote:
Ah I see, the "raw: " is in the main search query but not applicable
to advanced searches where you can combine the query with dates and /
or attachment preferences. Is there any way to utilize it in the
advanced search (I would imagine "Raw:" would replace To, From,
Subject, and Body- as those are all "MATCH" query participants. (I
don't use tags or notes currently, so I'm not sure if they are
contained in the MATCH phrase. Since dates and attachments aren't in
MATCH (but prior in the query) it would be great to utilize both of
them in tandem.

On Sun, May 2, 2021 at 2:38 PM Ryan Blenis <>

Hi Janos,

Thank you! The number of attachments seems to be working perfectly,
the "raw" updates don't seem to work, but maybe I'm misunderstanding
the implementation. There's no new "Raw" field in the advanced
search, so I tried putting "raw: testing" in the Body search field,
but the sphinx query showed "@body raw: testing" versus what was
expected: "testing". Am I misunderstanding the implementation and/or
where to utilize this? Thank you!

On Sun, May 2, 2021 at 8:28 AM <> wrote:

On 2021-05-02 09:15, Ryan Blenis wrote:

Ideally, in the dry run, I'd like to have it print "attachment:
much like the emails print "id: [id]" so I can get a count of
and associated attachment numbers, which is often required in
queries as a the "number of items" found for certain search
(I'm on a slightly older version that only prints "id: [id]" for
email found, though I believe you added an email found count at
end of the dry run in a newer version, ideally in that case
would be a count of emails, and a count of attachments as well).

This commit gives you the total number of attachments at the
in case of dry run:

Let me know if it meets your expectations, or you need the
for each
message instead.


Reply via email to