multiValued fields retain their order, for the record.
Erik
On Sep 4, 2007, at 12:37 AM, Jed Reynolds wrote:
One of the difficulties that you're going to find with multi-valued
fields is that they are an unordered collection without relation.
If you have a document with a list of
You could index both a compound field and the components separately.
This could be simplified by sending the value in once as the compound format:
review,1 Jan 2007
revision, 2 Jan 200
And then use a copyField with a regex tokenizer to extract and index
the date into a separate field. You
Thanks Yonik - I didnt know that before. But i am not sure how i can use the
range queries on this compound field so that i dont get the wrong result.
-Bharani
Yonik Seeley wrote:
You could index both a compound field and the components separately.
This could be simplified by sending the
No Size is not an issue - atleast for now. But i am thinking of implementing
some sort of duplicate removal based on field. I happen to look at this
thread
http://www.nabble.com/Group-results-by-field--tf3683765.html#a10296394
Tom mentions some changes to the code to do that so was thinking in
Bharani wrote:
Hi,
I have got two sets of document
1) Primary Document
2) Occurrences of primary document
Since there is no such thing as join i can either
a) Post the primary document with occurrences as multi valued field
or
b) Post the primary document for every occurrences i.e.
