]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 9:41 PM
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org; simon.willna...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Field.Index deprecation ?
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Simon Willnauer
simon.willna...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Michael McCandless
luc
Thanks for the response Mike and pointing me in the right direction.
I see that
TextField is indexed, tokenized, without term vectors
StringField is indexed, but not tokenized
If I wanted a stored field that is tokenized with stored term vectors would
this be the recommended approach?
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 9:12 AM, jeffthorne jeff.tho...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the response Mike and pointing me in the right direction.
I see that
TextField is indexed, tokenized, without term vectors
StringField is indexed, but not tokenized
If I wanted a stored field that is
Thanks again for the help Mike. Much appreciated.
Have a good one,
Jeff
--
View this message in context:
http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/Field-Index-deprecation-tp4050068p4050766.html
Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
I am new to Lucene and going through the Lucene in Action 2nd edition book. I
have a quick question on the best way to add fields to a document now that
Field.Index is deprecated.
Here is what I am doing and what most example online suggest:
doc.add(new Field(id, dbID, Store.YES,
We badly need Lucene in Action 3rd edition!
The easiest approach is to use one of the new XXXField classes under
oal.document, eg StringField for your example.
If none of the existing XXXFields fit, you can make a custom
FieldType, tweak all of its settings, and then create a Field from
that.
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Michael McCandless
luc...@mikemccandless.com wrote:
We badly need Lucene in Action 3rd edition!
go mike go!!!
;)
The easiest approach is to use one of the new XXXField classes under
oal.document, eg StringField for your example.
If none of the existing
: Field.Index deprecation ?
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Simon Willnauer
simon.willna...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Michael McCandless
luc...@mikemccandless.com wrote:
We badly need Lucene in Action 3rd edition!
go mike go!!!
Once is enough
