I don’t know if that’s completely true, or maybe I’m misunderstanding something.
If it doesn’t support purely negative subqueries, this shouldn't work, but does: q=*:*&fq=(-(field:V1)) However, for me, the following is a summary of what works & what doesn’t. q=*:*&fq=(-(field:V1)) - Works q=*:*&fq=((-(field:V1) AND -(field:V2)) AND -(field:V3)) - Doesn’t work q=*:*&fq=(-(field:V1) AND -(field:V2) AND -(field:V3)) - Works q=*:*&fq=((*:* -(field:V1) AND -(field:V2)) AND -(field:V3)) - Works On 4/22/15, 3:02 PM, "Jack Krupansky" <jack.krupan...@gmail.com> wrote: >A purely negative sub-query is not supported by Lucene - you need to have >at least one positive term, such as "*:*, at each level of sub-query. Try: > >((*:* -(field:V1) AND -(field:V2)) AND -(field:V3)) > >-- Jack Krupansky > >On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Dhutia, Devansh <ddhu...@gannett.com> >wrote: > >> I have an automated filter query builder that uses the SolrNet nuget >> package to build out boolean filters. I have a scenario where it is >> generating a fq in the following format: >> >> ((-(field:V1) AND -(field:V2)) AND -(field:V3)) >> The filter looks legal to me (albeit with extra parentheses), but the >> above yields 0 total results, even though I know eligible data exists. >> >> If I manually re-write the above filter as >> >> (-(field:V1) AND -(field:V2) AND -(field:V3)) >> I get the expected results. >> >> I realize the auto generated filter could be rewritten in a different >>way, >> but the question still remains, why is the first version not returning >>any >> results? >> >> Solr does not report any errors & returns successfully, just with 0 >> results. >> >> Thanks >>
