> field name.
>
> Uwe
>
> -
> Uwe Schindler
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
> http://www.thetaphi.de
> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Matthew Petersen [mailto:mdpe...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 20,
://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
> -Original Message-
> From: Matthew Petersen [mailto:mdpe...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 9:44 PM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Problem with numeric range query syntax in lucene 4.4.0
>
> Hi
>
Hi
I'm trying to submit a lucene query string to my index to return a data
based on a numeric range. I'm using the syntax provided in the Query
Parser Syntax document but the results I get indicate that the query is not
working correctly. Below is a unit test that proves that the range query
doe
Hi,
I have time stamp field for my documents which I have indexed as
DoubleField for NumericRange query to work.
This field "stream_time" is indexed as DoubleField("stream_time",
, Field.Store.No).
I get null value when I query a lucene document for this field by
using document.getField() call.
Do
gt;
> > public NumericField(String name)
> >
> > Creates a field for numeric values using the default precisionStep
> > NumericUtils.PRECISION_STEP_DEFAULT (4). The instance is not yet
> > initialized with a numeric value, before indexing a document
> > containin
ou
> > > miss some stored fields? E.g. the default NumericField ctor does not
> > > create the field as “stored” to the document?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > public NumericField(String name)
> > >
> > > Creates a field for numeric value
ricUtils.PRECISION_STEP_DEFAULT (4). The instance is not yet
> > initialized with a numeric value, before indexing a document
> > containing this field, set a value using the various set???Value()
> > methods. This constructor creates an indexed, but not stored field.
> >
> &
. This constructor creates an indexed, but not stored field.
>
>
>
> Uwe
>
>
>
> -
>
> Uwe Schindler
>
> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
>
> http://www.thetaphi.de
>
> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
>
>
>
>
>
> > -
field.
Uwe
-
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: u...@thetaphi.de
> -Original Message-
> From: Todd Nine [mailto:t...@spidertracks.co.nz]
> Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 6:13 AM
> To: java-user@lucene.apac
Hi all,
I'm having some issues with Numeric Range queries not working as
expected. My underlying storage medium is the Lucandra index reader and
writer, so I'm not sure if this is an issue within Lucandra or with my
usage of numeric field. My numeric range tests that are copies of Uwe's
pass in
I'm certain the timestamp field is being indexed. It is created as follows:
Document doc = new Document();
NumericField timeField = new NumericField("timestamp", 8); // Defaults to
indexing = true.
timeField.setLongValue( timeX);
doc.add( timeField);
...
indexWriter.a
Hi,
> Thank you for your timely response.
:-)
> It's going to take me longer to create an isolated test case you can test
this
> with. I will see what I can do.
That would be fine. Often with a simple test those errors disappear, because
they are problem in the logic somewhere else :) But you
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 12:23 PM
> To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Problem with Numeric range query.
>
>
> I have a set of documents that all have a "timestamp" field which is
stored as a
> long integer number. The field is indexed in my Lucene inde
ubject: Problem with Numeric range query.
>
>
> I have a set of documents that all have a "timestamp" field which is
stored as a
> long integer number. The field is indexed in my Lucene index as a number
> using NumericField with a precision step of 8:
>
&g
I have a set of documents that all have a "timestamp" field which is stored as
a long integer number. The field is indexed in my Lucene index as a number
using NumericField with a precision step of 8:
Field field = new NumericField("timestamp", 8);
field.setLongValue( timestampValue);
15 matches
Mail list logo
