Well, I recompiled SOLR against the latest lucene release (2.1.0) and it still doesn't work. The nabble reference page there indicates that it might not have worked right in 2.1.0 but someone there is suggesting that it works in the latest trunk.
Is there perhaps something else that would need to be enabled in SOLR beyong the leadingWildCard to have this work? Thanks for everyone's patience. On 3/21/07, Michael Kimsal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This looks like a lucene issue. http://www.nabble.com/-jira--Created%3A-%28LUCENE-839%29-WildcardQuery-do-not-find-documents-if-leading-and-trailing-*-is-used-tf3435336.html And it appears to have been fixed recently: "This problem was already fixed since 2.1.0. " When was 2.1.0 out? Oh - last month. Will there be new SOLR package bundles with the latest lucene? On 3/21/07, Michael Kimsal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I changed the 'leading wildcard' setting in the query parser (well, > actually someone else here did, but it works). > > *789 works > > but > > *456* still doesn't work. > > Yeah, I guess I'm seeing the same behaviour as you are. Does > this seem like a potential bug? Like the first * is cancelling out the > > logic for the second * ? > > > > On 3/21/07, Erik Hatcher < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Lucene now supports *456* type queries, however it requires setting > > an attribute to allow leading wildcards on the QueryParser. Solr > > does not set this flag (that I can tell in my quick search) so I > > don't believe you can do this with Solr currently, until/unless an > > option is made to set that flag. However, I just tried with my > > dataset and I don't get parse errors from a *foo* query, but I don't > > get results either (strange, it seems). > > > > Erik > > > > On Mar 21, 2007, at 2:59 PM, Michael Kimsal wrote: > > > > > Hello all: > > > > > > While I realize this goes against the grain of an indexing server, > > > is there > > > any way to do wildcard searching like the following: > > > > > > Term indexed is 123456789 > > > > > > Searching for *456* would find 123456789 > > > > > > Is there any mechanism to enable or allow for that scenario? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Michael Kimsal > > > http://webdevradio.com > > > > > > > -- > Michael Kimsal > http://webdevradio.com > -- Michael Kimsal http://webdevradio.com
-- Michael Kimsal http://webdevradio.com
