On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Robert Muir wrote:
>> Thanks Benson: look like the problem revolves around indexing
>> Document/Fields you get back from IR.document... this has always been
>> 'lossy', but I think this is a real API trap.
om: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 3:42 PM
>>>> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Problem with updating a document or TermQuery with current
>>>> trunk
>>>>
>>&g
etaphi.de
>>
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 3:42 PM
>>> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Problem with updating a docume
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 3:42 PM
>> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Problem with updating a document or TermQuery with current
>> trunk
>>
ay, March 06, 2012 3:42 PM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Problem with updating a document or TermQuery with current
> trunk
>
> Hmm something is up here... I'll dig. Seems like we are somehow analyzing
> StringField when we shouldn
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Robert Muir wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Robert Muir wrote:
>>> I think the issue is that your analyzer is standardanalyzer, yet field
>>> text value is "value-1"
>>
>> Robert,
>>
>> Why is
Hmm something is up here... I'll dig. Seems like we are somehow
analyzing StringField when we shouldn't...
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Robert Muir wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Robert Muir wrote:
>> I think the issue is that your analyzer is standardanalyzer, yet field
>> text value is "value-1"
>
> Robert,
>
> Why is this field analyzed at all? It's built with StringField.TYPE_STO
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Robert Muir wrote:
>> I think the issue is that your analyzer is standardanalyzer, yet field
>> text value is "value-1"
>
> Robert,
>
> Why is this field analyzed at all? It's built with StringField.TYPE_STO
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Robert Muir wrote:
> I think the issue is that your analyzer is standardanalyzer, yet field
> text value is "value-1"
Robert,
Why is this field analyzed at all? It's built with StringField.TYPE_STORED.
I'll push another copy that shows that it works fine when the
I think the issue is that your analyzer is standardanalyzer, yet field
text value is "value-1"
So standardanalyzer will tokenize this into two terms: "value" and "1"
But later, you proceed to do TermQueries on "value-1". This term won't
exist... TermQuery etc that take Term don't analyze any text
I've posted a self-contained test case to github of a mystery.
git://github.com/bimargulies/lucene-4-update-case.git
The code can be seen at
https://github.com/bimargulies/lucene-4-update-case/blob/master/src/test/java/org/apache/lucene/BadFieldTokenizedFlagTest.java.
I write a doc to an index,
12 matches
Mail list logo
