From java-user-return-45339-apmail-lucene-java-user-archive=lucene.apache.org@lucene.apache.org Sat Mar 06 10:11:51 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 86221 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2010 10:11:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 6 Mar 2010 10:11:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 11418 invoked by uid 500); 6 Mar 2010 10:11:32 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 11145 invoked by uid 500); 6 Mar 2010 10:11:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 11137 invoked by uid 99); 6 Mar 2010 10:11:31 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 06 Mar 2010 10:11:31 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [85.25.71.29] (HELO mail.troja.net) (85.25.71.29) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 06 Mar 2010 10:11:29 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.troja.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4CCBD36007 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2010 11:11:07 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.troja.net Received: from mail.troja.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (megaira.troja.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 58FwVutm6PSZ for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2010 11:11:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from VEGA (port-83-236-62-54.dynamic.qsc.de [83.236.62.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.troja.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B583AD36006 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2010 11:11:04 +0100 (CET) From: "Uwe Schindler" To: References: <55F9EF953014514EB6BEE1F5198CEEB4068EA766@exchange.slc.mainstreamdata.com> <009501cabd08$d4548f60$7cfdae20$@de> In-Reply-To: <009501cabd08$d4548f60$7cfdae20$@de> Subject: RE: Numeric Range Filter - bug or documentation oversight Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 11:11:22 +0100 Message-ID: <009601cabd15$5fc5c580$1f515080$@de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-index: Acq9AiXsDmfKqzFbT627wZ7iB4A8tgABctpAAANE1kA= Content-language: de Hi Scott, I verified by an additional test in NRQ (Lucene trunk), that true/false = together with null bound produces the same results, so there is no bug = at all. This test is new, as it explicitly tests on an index containing = infinity-float/min-max-integer values. The tests can be seen here: = http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=3Drevision&revision=3D919731 If you still have problems, ask giving more details like a testcase. Uwe ----- Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de > -----Original Message----- > From: Uwe Schindler [mailto:uwe@thetaphi.de] > Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2010 9:42 AM > To: java-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: RE: Numeric Range Filter - bug or documentation oversight >=20 > Hi Scott, >=20 > > But here's the issue that I solved but it seems like there is either > a > > bug in the NumericRangeFilter or there is some additional > documentation > > needed. I created a NumericRangeFilter with a null for the min. I > > would have thought that that meant the minInclusive could have been > > true > > or false and it wouldn't make a difference. That wasn't my > experience. > > It appears that it needs to be true for things to work the way I > would > > expect. It seems like that behavior should be documented or if it's > a > > bug, it should be fixed (but maybe I'm missing a use case). >=20 > What problems are you experiencing? For min/max=3D=3Dnull, the = inclusive > flags make no difference. Can you provide a testcase? The code in > NumericRangeQuery.NumericRangeTermEnum. (which is used for the > filter, too) is keeping the lowest/biggest value for null values. >=20 > > Btw- I believe the example in the first part of the description of > this > > class has the min and max values reversed. >=20 > > > > Filter f =3D NumericRangeFilter.newFloatRange("weight", 0.3f, 0.10f, > > true, > > true); >=20 > That is indeed wrong :-) I'll fix for 3.1. >=20 > Uwe >=20 >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org