Ok, thank you for the clarification. Cheers,
Riccardo On 10/29/05, Chris Hostetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > : I read that field are appendable (pag 33 of Lucene in Action), so it's > easy > : just add each extracted text to the same index field "section". > : What it happens is not the expected result, as it's said in Lucene in > : Action, that is, Lucene doesn't internally appends all the texts > together > : and index them in a single Field named "section". Or better, it does a > : mixture: if I use Luke to see the index, i saw a number of single fields > : called "section" each one with the corresponding text. > > The wording choice may not be entirely clear ... the field values are not > "appended" in a java String/StringBuffer sense. For the purposes of > *searching* the terms extracted from the field values are "appended" in > that the term position of the last term from the first value immediately > preceeds the term position of the first term from the second value. > > (at least, i think that's how it workds) > > as far as as the *stored* values of Fields, they are stored individually. > you can even have one Field with a field named "foo" that is not stored, > and another Field named "foo" that is stored -- both will be searchable, > but only the second will be returned. > > : If i try to retrieve the section field with a simple query, it only > returns > : me the first text contained in the first "section" field, instead of all > the > : texts, as if they were indexed in the same field "section". > > I'm guessing you are using Document.get(String), or > Document.getField(String) ... try using Document.getValues(String) or > Document.getFields(String). > > > > > -Hoss > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Riccardo Daviddi University of Siena - Information Engeneering [EMAIL PROTECTED]
