See below (and your other mail) On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 1:59 PM, John G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Thanks Erick, > > Yes PerFieldAnalyzerWrapper is my friend :>). > > Another related question, I'm putting these values into a document in > fields > with the same name. 'codesearch' e.g. > > "codesearch", "B05 1" > "codesearch", "Q070301 4" etc. > > I read where only the last field entered is actually indexed but I can't > find that post now. Is this true? How can I get around it? No, that's not true. That's what PositionIncrementGap is all about, handling this very situation. > > Thanks again. > > John G. > > > John Griffin-3 wrote: > > > > My previous question may be moot but as is it is still a problem. Here's > a > > little more info on my problem. The same named fields contain two pieces > > of > > information, a code "B05" and a value "1" as follows. The value can be a > > range such as 1 to 5 or 1 to 100. > > > > > > > > "codesearch", "B05 1" > > > > > > > > This field and other identically names but differently valued fields in > > the > > same document are related to a specific person as identified by another > > field say SSN. So, one person can have multiple code searches. Both of > the > > codesearch values are related to one another and must be searchable such > > as > > > > > > > > Return all persons with a codesearch value of B05 ranging from 1 to 3. > > > > > > > > How can I go about this? Do these codesearch fields need to be in a > > separate > > index related by SSN? > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > > > > John G. > > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Re-tokenized-fields-disappear-tp19850534p19863821.html > Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
