I've heard that 0.9.9 is being used in a lot of places in production, so I'd say it's stable enough. Make sure you grab the 0.9.9 branch of Thinking Sphinx from GitHub though.
Cheers -- Pat On 31/03/2009, at 3:02 PM, vk wrote: > > Hi Pat, > the attribute def is like > has signed_int > I went through some code and found that Sphinx 9.8 does not have > anything for signed ints.... 9.9 is coming with that but still a RC. I > gotta use this in prod environment. Is it advisable ? > > On Mar 31, 4:38 am, Pat Allan <[email protected]> wrote: >> What's your define_index block looking like, and which field/ >> attribute >> are you sorting by? It might be a limitation in Sphinx, which I'm >> almost certain isn't too friendly to negative integers - it likes >> unsigned ints. >> >> -- >> Pat >> >> On 31/03/2009, at 2:25 AM, vk wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi Pat, >> >>> I am facing this issue for negative integers. When sorting >>> with :sort_mode => :desc, negative ints come first. >> >>>> On 11/03/2009, at 12:37 AM, Martin wrote: >> >>>>> Hi >>>>> I like to order a search request by an integer field. But when I >>>>> do so >>>>> the order (comments_count) is 1, 11, 2 and not 1, 2, 11. How can I >>>>> define the index that the field can be ordered like an integer and >>>>> not >>>>> a string? >> >>>>> My articles model right now: >>>>> define_index do >>>>> indexes title, :sortable => true >>>>> indexes comments_count, :as => :comments, :sortable => true >>>>> end > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thinking Sphinx" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/thinking-sphinx?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
