Yes, I don't need a ShingleFilter I understand it by now. Yes I will have many of these phrases in the documents... this is why I thought I shouldn't use Lucene fields.
I will investigate further your keyword approach sounds like possible, thx for the tip. However I presume I may need to normalize the phrases for the search phase, so it may not work. Keep in touch, -RB- On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Steven A Rowe <sar...@syr.edu> wrote: > Hi Raymond, > > On 3/2/2009 at 10:09 AM, Raymond Balmès wrote: > > suppose I have a tri-gram, what I want to do is index the tri-gram > > "string digit1 digit2" as one indexing phrase, and not index each token > > separately. > > As long as you don't want any transformation performed on the phrase or its > components, you can add your phrase as a "keyword", i.e. a non-analyzed > string that will be indexed as-is. > > Unless your phrase field will be the only field on this document (pretty > unlikely), you'll want to use PerFieldAnalyzerWrapper[1] over > KeywordAnalyzer[2] for the phrase field, and whatever other analyzer you > like for the other document field(s). > > AFAICT, you don't need ShingleFilter. > > Steve > > [1] PerFieldAnalyzerWrapper: > http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_4_0/api/org/apache/lucene/analysis/PerFieldAnalyzerWrapper.html > [2] KeywordAnalyzer: > http://lucene.apache.org/java/2_4_0/api/org/apache/lucene/analysis/KeywordAnalyzer.html > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
