Erik,
"Given the position increment gap between instances of same-named
fields that is now part of Lucene, I recommend using multiple field
instances instead."
Did you mean ... recommend "NOT" using multiple field ?
If we want to do query like "name:John" or boasting of Fields ... then we
have to use multiple field instances, right ?
On 8/24/06, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yeah, I used a cruder form by appending all the text together into a
single string with a space separator in that LIA example.
Given the position increment gap between instances of same-named
fields that is now part of Lucene, I recommend using multiple field
instances instead.
Erik
On Aug 24, 2006, at 3:05 AM, Gopikrishnan Subramani wrote:
> Erik's has used a space as the field separator. May be you can use a
> different field separator that your analyzer won't eat up, so that
> will
> change the token position by 1.
>
> Gopi
>
> On 8/24/06, KEGan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Erik,
>>
>> What is generally the reason for indexing both individual fields,
>> and the
>> general-purpose "content" field ?
>>
>> Also, if we search in the general-purpose "content" field, wouldnt
>> this
>> problem occurs. Let say we have 2 fields and the following values:
>>
>> name : John Smith
>> food : subway sandwich
>>
>> So the general-purpose "content" would have the following values:
>>
>> John Smith subway sandwich
>>
>> Hence, if the user search for "smith subway" (with quotation), the
>> said
>> document will be returned. On the other hand, if both fields were
>> indexed
>> seperately, this document would not be returned, since there is no
>> field
>> that contain the value "smith subway".
>>
>> How do we go about this problem ?
>>
>>
>> On 8/24/06, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Aug 23, 2006, at 11:36 AM, Suba Suresh wrote:
>> > > In "Lucene In Action" book it says it is better practice to
>> combine
>> > > two fields into one field and index it than use the
>> > > MultiFieldQueryParser. Do I initially index both the fields and
>> > > then index them again together? When I index them together do I
>> > > index the fieldnames or values? Can someone give me an example of
>> > > how to do it?
>> >
>> > What I do is simply index all the fields individually that need
>> to be
>> > searchable or just stored, but also index a general-purpose
>> > "contents" field with all of that same text.
>> >
>> > You can add multiple fields of the same name to a document,
>> making it
>> > easy to just keep appending to a "contents" field for a document.
>> > You can see how this is done in the Lucene in Action code in the
>> > TestDataDocumentHandler.java - however I took a cruder approach and
>> > appended the fields together with a space in between them rather
>> than
>> > using the multiple valued field approach. Either technique will
>> work
>> > just fine.
>> >
>> > Erik
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
