I can't reproduce any problem. Are you using a recent nightly build? See the example schema of a recent nightly build for the correct way to define a Trie based field - the article / blog may be out of date.
Here's what I used to test the example data: http://localhost:8983/solr/select?q=manufacturedate_dt:[NOW/DAY-4YEAR%20TO%20NOW/DAY] -Yonik http://www.lucidimagination.com On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 3:49 AM, Aleksander Stensby<aleksander.sten...@integrasco.com> wrote: > Hello everyone, > after reading Grant's article about TrieRange capabilities on the lucid blog > I did some experimenting, but I have some trouble with the tdate type and I > was hoping that you guys could point me in the right direction. > So, basically I index a regular solr date field and use that for sorting and > range queries today. For experimenting I added tdate field, indexing it with > the same data as in my other date field, but I'm obviously doing something > wrong here, because the results coming back are completely different... > the definitions in my schema: > <field name="datetime" type="date" indexed="true" stored="false" > omitNorms="true"/> > <field name="tdatetime" type="tdate" indexed="true" stored="false"/> > > so if I do a query on my test index: > q=datetime:[NOW/DAY-1YEAR TO NOW/DAY] > i get numFound="1031524" (don't worry about the ordering yet).. > then, if I do the following on my trie date field: > q=tdatetime:[NOW/DAY-1YEAR TO NOW/DAY] > i get numFound="0" > Where did I go wrong? (And yes, both fields are indexed with the exactly > same data...) > Thanks for any guidance here! > Cheers, > Aleks > > -- > Aleksander M. Stensby > Lead Software Developer and System Architect > Integrasco A/S > www.integrasco.com > http://twitter.com/Integrasco > http://facebook.com/Integrasco > > Please consider the environment before printing all or any of this e-mail >
