]
Sanne Grinovero commented on HSEARCH-960:
-----------------------------------------
right you have a point. But even assuming that this mapping was possible, in your example
of '1234 Years Ago' and '1234.56.abcd' being present in the index, would
you tokenize or would you not tokenize the query input? Are you thinking in querying the
index on both options by building a boolean query?
Index.UN_TOKENIZED overrides other tokenized fields that share the
same name
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: HSEARCH-960
URL:
http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/browse/HSEARCH-960
Project: Hibernate Search
Issue Type: Bug
Components: mapping
Affects Versions: 3.4.0.Final
Environment: 3.4.0 Final
Reporter: John-Michael Au
Labels: annotations, bug, override, tokenized, un_tokenized
Fix For: 3.4.2, 4.0.0.CR2
Marking one field as un-tokenized causes all other fields with the same names to be
un-tokenized.
i.e.
{code}
@Field(name = "simple_search", index = Index.UN_TOKENIZED, store = Store.NO)
private String string;
@Field(name = "simple_search", index = Index.TOKENIZED, store = Store.NO)
private String string2;
{code}
The resulting behaviour is that "simple_search" will be made up of un-tokenized
'string' and 'string2' values, even though 'string2' was specified
to be tokenized.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: