seems what u got is the terms other than the raw data. maybe u should check the api docs for more details 2013-10-11 上午3:56于 "JT" <handyrems...@gmail.com>写道：
> I'm running into some issues developing a custom functionquery. > > My goal is to be able to implement a custom sorting technique. > > I have a field defined called resname, it is a single value str. > > Example: <str name="resname">/some > example/data/here/2013/09/12/testing.text</str> > > I would like to do a custom sort based on this resname field. > Basically, I would like to parse out that date there (2013/09/12) and sort > on that date. > > > I've followed various tutorials > - http://java.dzone.com/news/how-write-custom-solr > - > http://www.supermind.org/blog/756/how-to-write-a-custom-solr-functionquery > > > Im at the point where my code compiles, runs, executes, etc. Solr is happy > with my code. > > I have classes that inherit from ValueSorceParser and ValueSorce, etc. I've > overrode parse and > instantiated my class with ValueSource > > public ValueSource parse(FunctionQParser fqp) { > return MyCustomClass(fqp.parseValueSource) > } > > public class MyCustomClass extends ValueSource { > ValueSource source; > > public MyCustomClass(ValueSource source) { > this.source = source; > } > > public FunctionValues getValues(....) { > final FunctionValues sourceDV = > source.getvalues(context,readerContext) > return new IntValues(this) > public int intVal(int doc) { > //parse the value of "resname" here > String value = sourceDV.strVal(doc); > ...more stuff > } > } > } > > The issue I'm running into is that my call to sourceDV.strVal(doc) only > returns "part" of the field, not all of it. It appears to be very random. > > I guess my actual question is, how do I access / reference the EXACT RAW > value of a field, while writing a functionquery. > > Do I need to change my ValueSource to a String?, then somehow lookup the > field name while inside my getValues call? > > Is there a way to access the raw field data , when referencing it as a > FunctionValues? > > > Maybe I'm going about this totally incorrectly? >
