There are some tricks you can apply, but they amount to keeping your own lists and manipulating them manually. As Ian says, Lucene isn't a database, and if you find yourself spending much time trying to *make* it behave like a database you should probably re-think your approach.
But in this case, you could say use an ID for your supplier and keep a separate document with fields not in your usual schema (remember, there's no requirement that all docs have the same fields), read in and cache that document and use *it* to make the correlation. Then, when your suppliers changed their names, you'd only have to change one doc. But then you have to look up your supplier names in the document and substitute those IDs into your queries. And use the "special" doc to lookup the names for display and..... You see where this leads, each step in and of itself isn't very hard, but pretty soon you're writing a RDMBS. But is it worth it? How often does the supplier in your example change their name? And how painful is reindexing? I've often found that it's not that difficult to just reindex as necessary. Best Erick On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 4:05 AM, sameerpatil <nabblegm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > I have a requirement where I have a list of Suppliers(documents for lucene > index) and a list of Products(documents again). Each Product has a > supplier. > e.g. : > Product -> RouterX, Supplier -> DLink, Netgear > Product -> RouterY, Supplier -> Cisco > > If I search for Cisco, RouterY should show up. If I implement the supplier > as a Field in the Document - Router, I will have to update all the Products > if the name of a Supplier changes. > > Can I not just link the field - supplier in Product to the Supplier somehow > rather than duplicating ?? > > -thanks > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/Linking-Fields-to-Documents-possible--tp26474610p26474610.html > Sent from the Lucene - Java Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
