On Thursday 10 February 2005 18:44, Luke Shannon wrote:
> Are there any issues with having a bunch of boolean queries and than adding
> them to one big boolean queries (making them all required)?
The 1.4.3 and earlier BooleanScorer has an out of bounds exception
for "More than 32 required/prohibit
ene Users List"
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: Problem searching Field.Keyword field
Kelvin - I respectfully disagree - could you elaborate on why this is
not an appropriate use of Field.Keyword?
If the category is "How To", Field.Text would split this (depen
ene Users List"
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: Problem searching Field.Keyword field
Kelvin - I respectfully disagree - could you elaborate on why this is
not an appropriate use of Field.Keyword?
If the category is "How To", Field.Text would split this (depen
On Wed, 2005-02-09 at 06:56 -0500, Erik Hatcher wrote:
> The only caveat to your VerbatimAnalyzer is that it will still split
> strings that are over 255 characters. CharTokenizer does that.
> Granted, though, that keyword fields probably don't make much sense to
> be that long.
>
> As mentio
The only caveat to your VerbatimAnalyzer is that it will still split
strings that are over 255 characters. CharTokenizer does that.
Granted, though, that keyword fields probably don't make much sense to
be that long.
As mentioned yesterday - I added the LIA KeywordAnalyzer into the
contrib a
On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 12:19 -0500, Steven Rowe wrote:
> Why is there no KeywordAnalyzer? That is, an analyzer which doesn't
> mess with its input in any way, but just returns it as-is?
>
> I realize that under most circumstances, it would probably be more code
> to use it than just constructing
On Feb 8, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Steven Rowe wrote:
Why is there no KeywordAnalyzer? That is, an analyzer which doesn't
mess with its input in any way, but just returns it as-is?
I realize that under most circumstances, it would probably be more
code to use it than just constructing a TermQuery,
r the quick response.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for my lack of understanding, but I am learning! Won't
>>>> the query parser still handle this query? My limited
>>>> understanding was that the search call provides the 'all'
>>>>
a dropdown that can be used
in the advanced search so that they can search only for a specific
category of documents (like HowTo, Troubleshooting, etc).
-Original Message-
From: Kelvin Tan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday,
February 08, 2005 9:32 AM To: Lucene Users List
Sub
ooting, etc).
-Original Message-
From: Kelvin Tan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday,
February 08, 2005 9:32 AM To: Lucene Users List
Subject: RE: Problem searching Field.Keyword field
Mike, is there a reason why you're indexing "category" as keyword
not text?
k
oubleshooting, etc).
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Kelvin Tan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday,
> February 08, 2005 9:32 AM To: Lucene Users List
> Subject: RE: Problem searching Field.Keyword field
>
> Mike, is there a reason why you're indexing "category&quo
can search only
for a specific category of documents (like HowTo, Troubleshooting, etc).
-Original Message-
From: Kelvin Tan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 9:32 AM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: RE: Problem searching Field.Keyword field
Mike, is there a reason
inal Message-
> From: Miles Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent:
> Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:08 AM To: Lucene Users List Subject:
> Re: Problem searching Field.Keyword field
>
> You're using the query parser with the standard analyser. You
> should construct a ter
,
searches like author:Mike" and title:Lucene work fine.
-Original Message-
From: Miles Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:08 AM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Problem searching Field.Keyword field
You're using the query parser with the standa
Hi Mike,
If you use a different analyzer, say a custom one the didn't do anything
to the original search query, then you could use the query parser to
search on the keyword field. The standard analyzer does things like
making everything lowercase, removing stop words etc. Since the value
held in t
Javadocs for Field.Keyword says:
Constructs a Date-valued Field that is not tokenized and is indexed, and stored
in the index, for return with hits.
For most purposes dealing with Strings, use Field.Text, unless you have a date,
a GUID or some other string you don't want tokenized or processed
t specified. Using the current code,
searches like author:Mike" and title:Lucene work fine.
-Original Message-
From: Miles Barr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:08 AM
To: Lucene Users List
Subject: Re: Problem searching Field.Keyword field
You're u
You're using the query parser with the standard analyser. You should
construct a term query manually instead.
--
Miles Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Runtime Collective Ltd.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional
First let me say - Awesome tool! Almost too easy to be true, but with
that being said
Hi, I have read several articles and postings that indicate that the
Field.Keyword field should be searchable but it's not working for me,
until I change to Field.Text. Parts of the index and search code
19 matches
Mail list logo
