ng that there is no way have a field with no value?, with
> > text fields they seem to make sense than for string?.
> > You are right on fieldName:[* TO *] results, which basically returned
> > all the documents which included the couple of documents in question.
> > -Viswa
&
rformance-wise.
Bob Sandiford | Lead Software Engineer | SirsiDynix
P: 800.288.8020 X6943 | bob.sandif...@sirsidynix.com
www.sirsidynix.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Viswa S [mailto:svis...@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 5:38 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apa
have a field with no value?, with text
> fields they seem to make sense than for string?.
> You are right on fieldName:[* TO *] results, which basically returned all the
> documents which included the couple of documents in question.
> -Viswa
>> Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 17:20:5
mpty
> > string. Find below the output of a facet on the fieldName.
> > ThanksViswa
> >
> >
> > 22 > name="GDOGPRODY.424">221
> > > Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 15:29:06 -0500
> > > Subject: Re: Empty value/string matching
> > > From: e
PM, Viswa S wrote:
>
> Yes I do have a couple of documents with no values and one with an empty
> string. Find below the output of a facet on the fieldName.
> ThanksViswa
>
>
> 22 name="GDOGPRODY.424">221
> > Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 15:29:06 -0500
> > Subjec
Yes I do have a couple of documents with no values and one with an empty
string. Find below the output of a facet on the fieldName.
ThanksViswa
1
> Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 15:29:06 -0500
> Subject: Re: Empty value/string matching
> From: erickerick...@gmail.com
> T
Are you absolutely sure your documents really don't have any values for
"FieldName"? Because your results are perfectly correct if every doc has a
value for "FieldName".
Or are you saying there no such field as "FieldName"?
Best
Erick
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Viswa S wrote:
>
> Folks,A
