Hi,
I've used NumericField to store my "hour" field.
Example...
doc.add(new NumericField("hour").setIntValue(Integer.parseInt("12")));
Before I was using plain string Field and enumerating them with
TermEnum, which worked fine.
Now I'm using NumericField's I'm not sure how to port this enu
Hi Phil,
thanks for checking out NumericField. I have two comments about your
problem:
> I've used NumericField to store my "hour" field.
>
> Example...
>
> doc.add(new
> NumericField("hour").setIntValue(Integer.parseInt("12")));
NumericField uses a spezial encoding of terms for fast Nume
Hi Uwe,
Thanks for the explanation! It really helps. That makes sense that for
a small number of values, such as "hour" NumericField is not going to
help me. I'm experimenting with using epoch NumericField for sorting,
which funnily is where I started with 2.4.1, before going down the
usual TooMan
>> NumericField uses a spezial encoding of terms for fast NumericRangeQueries.
>> It indexes more than one term per value. How many terms depends on the
>> precisionStep ctor parameter. If you set it to infinity (or something ge the
>> bit size of your value, 32 for ints, it indexes exactly one va
> >> Maybe I add this t the javadocs.
> >>
> +1 - intuition might be to use it for anything numeric.
If we do not need a new RC fort hat I can do it tomorrow! I am not yet sure
what to write: I tend to say: "Use NumericField, but with infinite
precisionStep for low-cardinality fields - and you get
Uwe Schindler wrote:
Maybe I add this t the javadocs.
>> +1 - intuition might be to use it for anything numeric.
>>
>
> If we do not need a new RC fort hat I can do it tomorrow! I am not yet sure
> what to write: I tend to say: "Use NumericField, but with infinite
> pre
> > If we do not need a new RC fort hat I can do it tomorrow! I am not yet
> sure
> > what to write: I tend to say: "Use NumericField, but with infinite
> > precisionStep for low-cardinality fields - and you get the old TermEnum
> > value list as before (with conversion through NumericUtils)". In
>
Uwe Schindler wrote:
>
>> My personal opinion is that we can make javadoc changes for the final
>> without doing an RC, as long as no code/build/scipts at all is touched.
>> Not sure how others feel though.
>>
>
> I just wanted to ask for confirmation.
>
> Uwe
>
>
I know - we always should
