On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, Wagner, Alexander wrote: > The ind:val-example I gave, where you noticed it is perfrctly ok, is > actually broken on JuSER.
Would you have an example that fails on our demo site? >> (ind:"val1" and ind:"val2") and ((ind:"val3" or ind:"val4") or >> ind:"val5") If you use this query literally, then please note that several pairs of parentheses are not needed here, as they are chaining within the same AND or OR sequence. You can reduce the above to: ind:"val1" and ind:"val2" and (ind:"val3" or ind:"val4" or ind:"val5") The logic being: (A and B) and ((C or D) or E) == A and B and (C or D or E) It may be helpful to the query parser to always reduce the number of incoming parentheses. Best regards -- Tibor Simko
