I think it's probably good to treat word + number as (subject =~ "word" and subject =~ "number") or (subject =~ "word" and id = number). However, as mentioned quoting number is workaround in the current versions.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Bart <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I've reproduced your problem using RT 4.0.8 using the quick search, since > I'm assuming this is where your trying this query? > > When you use the quotes it treats the search argument as a string, when > you enter just a number it searches for that ticket ID. > So if you want to search for a number (just a number) you use quotes to > stop RT from looking for a ticket ID. > > So far the above scenario is kinda what they mention on the search page: > > Search for tickets by entering *id* numbers, subject words *"in quotes"*, >> *queues* by name, Owners by *username*, Requestors by *email address*, >> and ticket *statuses*. >> Any word not recognized by RT is searched for in ticket subjects. >> Entering *initial*, *active*, *inactive*, or *any* limits results to >> tickets with one of the respective types of statuses. Any individual status >> name limits results to just the statuses named. >> Start the search term with the name of a supported field followed by a >> colon, as in *queue:"Example Queue"* and *owner:[email protected]*, to >> explicitly specify the search type. >> CFs may be searched using a similar syntax as above with *cf.Name:value*. >> For the full power of RT's searches, please visit the search builder >> interface <https://rt.bkwi.nl/Search/Build.html>. > > > But in this case, you search for a word + number. I'd personally expect RT > to treat that entire phrase as a string, so this might be a bug? > > Though on the other hand, the above text from the search page clearly > states that subject words should be "in quotes". Which might mean that this > is by design. > > Anyways, personally I agree with you and I'd expect a different behaviur > in this situaiton. > > But I don't know exactly how this part "should" work, so maybe someone > from bestpractical could drop a line on "this is by design" or "this is a > bug"? > > -- > Bart G. > > > 2013/4/11 Явор Маринов <[email protected]> > >> Forgot to mension - we are using RT 4.0.10 >> >> >> Hello, >>> >>> Any comments regards this will be much appreciated because this is >>> critical issue for us. Once you search from the search engine (for example >>> vlan 90) nothing is displayed as results. However if you try to search for >>> "vlan 90" correct results are displayed. So far, this is a big issue, >>> because my colleagues from Support department should know the exact phrase >>> of the subject of the ticket or their ID which is quite frustrating. Is >>> there any work around or probably an addon for RT which should enable >>> "this" type of search. >>> >>> >>> >> > -- Best regards, Ruslan.
