I think this will work. Ill try it tomorrow and let you know.
Thanks for the help Eric and Shawn
Kris
-Original Message-
From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:erik.hatc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2016 2:43 PM
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: prefix query help
It’s hard
s 1, 2 and 6
>
> yes I know its wonky but its what I have to deal with until he content is
> cleaned up.
> I cant use date type.. that would make my life to easy.
>
> TIA again
> Kris
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Erik Hatcher&
its wonky but its what I have to deal with until he content is
cleaned up.
I cant use date type.. that would make my life to easy.
TIA again
Kris
- Original Message -----
From: "Erik Hatcher" <erik.hatc...@gmail.com>
To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, Decembe
On 12/8/2016 10:02 AM, KRIS MUSSHORN wrote:
>
> Here is how I have the field defined... see attachment.
You're using a tokenized field type.
For the kinds of queries you asked about here, you want to use StrField,
not TextField -- this type cannot have an analysis chain and indexes to
one token
Kris -
To chain multiple prefix queries together:
q=({!prefix f=field1 v=‘prefix1'} {!prefix f=field2 v=‘prefix2’})
The leading paren is needed to ensure it’s being parsed with the lucene qparser
(be sure not to have defType set, or a variant would be needed) and that allows
multiple {!…}
Here is how I have the field defined... see attachment.
- Original Message -
From: "Erick Erickson" <erickerick...@gmail.com>
To: "solr-user" <solr-user@lucene.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2016 10:44:08 AM
Subject: Re: prefix query hel
You'd probably be better off indexing it as a "string" type given your
expectations. Depending on the analysis chain (do take a look at
admin/analysis for the field in question) the tokenization can be tricky
to get right.
Best,
Erick
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 7:18 AM, KRIS MUSSHORN
