Hey man dont advertise or opinion. Lucene is just fine the way it is. Your just idolating some Jesuit opinion to try and hurt people and disinformation.
Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 23, 2023, at 2:25 PM, Cody Amen <cody.a...@icloud.com> wrote: > > As oppossed to like i want to find everything less than < 6.00 > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Oct 20, 2023, at 7:05 AM, Michael Wechner <michael.wech...@wyona.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Adrien >> >> Thank you very much for your feedback as well! >> >> I just replaced the StringField by KeywordField :-) >> >> Thanks >> >> Michael >> >>>> Am 20.10.23 um 14:13 schrieb Adrien Grand: >>> FYI there is also KeywordField, which combines StringField and >>> SortedSetDocValuesField. It supports filtering, sorting, faceting and >>> retrieval. It's my go-to field for string values. >>> >>> Le ven. 20 oct. 2023, 12:20, Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com> >>> a écrit : >>> >>> There are some differences. >>> >>> StringField is indexed into the inverted index (postings) so you >>> can do >>> efficient filtering. You can also store in stored fields to retrieve. >>> >>> FacetField does everything StringField does (filtering, storing >>> (maybe?)), >>> but in addition it stores data for faceting. I.e. you can compute >>> facet >>> counts or simple aggregations at search time. >>> >>> FacetField is also hierarchical: you can filter and facet by different >>> points/levels of your hierarchy. >>> >>> Mike McCandless >>> >>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 5:43 AM Michael Wechner >>> <michael.wech...@wyona.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> I have found the following simple Facet Example >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/lucene/blob/main/lucene/demo/src/java/org/apache/lucene/demo/facet/SimpleFacetsExample.java >>>> >>>> whereas for a simple categorization of documents I currently use >>>> StringField, e.g. >>>> >>>> doc1.add(new StringField("category", "book")); >>>> doc1.add(new StringField("category", "quantum_physics")); >>>> doc1.add(new StringField("category", "Neumann")) >>>> doc1.add(new StringField("category", "Wheeler")) >>>> >>>> doc2.add(new StringField("category", "magazine")); >>>> doc2.add(new StringField("category", "astro_physics")); >>>> >>>> which works well, but would it be better to use Facets for this, >>> e.g. >>>> >>>> doc1.add(new FacetField("media-type", "book")); >>>> doc1.add(new FacetField("topic", "physics", "quantum"); >>>> doc1.add(new FacetField("author", "Neumann"); >>>> doc1.add(new FacetField("author", "Wheeler"); >>>> >>>> doc1.add(new FacetField("media-type", "magazine")); >>>> doc1.add(new FacetField("topic", "physics", "astro"); >>>> >>>> ? >>>> >>>> IIUC the StringField approach is more general, whereas the >>> FacetField >>>> approach allows to do a more specific categorization / search. >>>> Or do I misunderstand this? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> Michael >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org >>>> >>>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
