Tried with plong, pint and string. Reindexed after each change. The sort
results on numeric values being shown are the same -
Ascending
1
10
100
2
2100
3

Descending
9999
999
99
9
888888
88
77777777

On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 at 17:15, Anuj Bhargava <anujb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Numeric sorting. Did the re-indexing. But didn't work.
>
> Regards,
>
> Anuj
>
> On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 at 16:44, Munendra S N <sn.munendr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >
>> > What should I use for numeric search.
>>
>> numeric search or numeric sorting?
>>
>>  I tried with pint also, but the result was the same.
>>
>> It should have worked. please make sure data is reindexed after fieldType
>> changes
>>
>> Regards,
>> Munendra S N
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 4:10 PM Anuj Bhargava <anujb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I tried with pint also, but the result was the same. What should I use
>> for
>> > numeric search.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Anuj
>> >
>> > On Fri, 6 Dec 2019 at 15:55, Munendra S N <sn.munendr...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi Anuj,
>> > > As the field type is String, lexicographical sorting is done, not
>> numeric
>> > > sorting.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Munendra S N
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 3:12 PM Anuj Bhargava <anujb...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > When I sort desc on posting_id sort=posting_id%20desc, I get the
>> > > following
>> > > > result
>> > > > "posting_id":"9999313"
>> > > > "posting_id":"9999312"
>> > > > "posting_id":"9999310"
>> > > >
>> > > > When I sort asc on posting_id sort=posting_id%20asc, I get the
>> > following
>> > > > result
>> > > > "posting_id":"10005343"
>> > > > "posting_id":"10005349"
>> > > > "posting_id":"10005359"
>> > > >
>> > > > *In descending the 8 figure numbers are not coming up first and in
>> > > > ascending the 7 figure numbers are not coming up first.*
>> > > >
>> > > > Entry in schema is -
>> > > > <field name="posting_id" type="string" indexed="true" stored="true"
>> > > > required="true" docValues="true" multiValued="false"/>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to