lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yonik Seeley <ysee...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Binary fields in index
Date Mon, 26 Sep 2005 13:55:36 GMT
Binary fields can be stored, but not indexed.

-Yonik
Now hiring -- http://tinyurl.com/7m67g

On 9/26/05, Fredrik Andersson <fidde.andersson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I was hoping to avoid the overhead of encoding/decoding, but it looks like
> I'll have to do that :(
>
> While on the topic, I noticed in the Field class that we have a "isBinary"
> boolean flag, however this always gets set to false in the constructors as
> well as the default value, and I can't even see a usage of this flag at
> write-time. What's the point of this flag, a feature for binary fields
> that
> was never implemented? I'm talking about the latest sources now, by the
> way,
> 1.9.something.
>
> Fredrik
>
> On 9/26/05, Koji Sekiguchi <koji.sekiguchi@m4.dion.ne.jp> wrote:
> >
> > You can encode (e.g. base64) the binary data to get a String
> > and store the String.
> >
> > Koji
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Fredrik Andersson [mailto:fidde.andersson@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 6:31 PM
> > > To: general@lucene.apache.org
> > > Subject: Binary fields in index
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello Gang!
> > >
> > > Is there any trick, or undocumented way, to store binary (unindexed,
> > > untokenized) data in a Lucene Field? All the Field
> > > constructors just deal
> > > with Strings. I'm currently using another database to store
> > > binary data, but
> > > it would be very neat, and more efficient, to store it
> > > directly in Lucene.
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > > Fredrik
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message