lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Praveen Peddi" <ppe...@contextmedia.com>
Subject Fw: sorting tokenized field
Date Mon, 13 Dec 2004 15:47:41 GMT
Hi all,
I forwarding the same email I sent before. Just wanted to try my luck again 
:).

Thanks in advance.
Praveen
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Praveen Peddi" <ppeddi@contextmedia.com>
To: "Lucene Users List" <lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: sorting tokenized field


> Since I am not aware of the lucene code much, I couldn't make much out of 
> your patch. But is this patch already tested and proved to be efficient? 
> If so, why can't it be merge into the lucene code and made it part of the 
> release. I think the bug is valid. Its very likely that people want to 
> sort on tokenized fields.
>
> If I apply this patch to lucene code and use it for myself, I will have 
> hard time managing it in future (while upgrading lucene library). If the 
> pathc is applied to lucene release code, it would be very easy for the 
> lucene users.
>
> If possible, can someone explain what the path does? I am trying to 
> understand what exactly changed but could not figrue out.
>
> Praveen
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Aviran" <amordo@infosciences.com>
> To: "'Lucene Users List'" <lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 2:30 PM
> Subject: RE: sorting tokenized field
>
>
>>I have suggested a solution for this problem (
>> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30382 ) you can use the
>> patch suggested there and recompile lucene.
>>
>>
>> Aviran
>> http://www.aviransplace.com
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:erik@ehatchersolutions.com]
>> Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 13:53 PM
>> To: Lucene Users List
>> Subject: Re: sorting tokenized field
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 10, 2004, at 1:40 PM, Praveen Peddi wrote:
>>> I read that the tokenised fields cannot be sorted. In order to sort
>>> tokenized field, either the application has to duplicate field with
>>> diff name and not tokenize it or come up with something else. But
>>> shouldn't the search engine takecare of this? Are there any plans of
>>> putting this functionality built into lucene?
>>
>> It would be wasteful for Lucene to assume any field you add should be
>> available for sorting.
>>
>> Adding one more line to your indexing code to accommodate your sorting
>> needs seems a pretty small price to pay.  Do you have suggestions to
>> improve how this works?   Or how it is documented?
>>
>> Erik
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-user-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message