My bad. I misunderstood what you wanted. The example I gave was for the searching side of things. Not the data representation in the document.
-Todd -----Original Message----- From: Aleksey Gogolev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 11:14 AM To: Feak, Todd Subject: Re[4]: Question about copyField FT> I would suggest doing this in your schema, then starting up Solr and FT> using the analysis admin page to see if it will index and search the way FT> you want. That way you don't have to pay the cost of actually indexing FT> the data to find out. Thanks. I did it exactly like you said. I created a fieldType "ex" (short for experiment), defined corresponding <copyFiled> and try it on the analysis page. Here is what I got (I uploaded the page, so you can see it): http://tut-i-tam.com.ua/static/analysis.jsp.htm I want the final token "samsung spinpoint p spn hard drive gb ata" to be the actual "ex" value. So I expect such response: <result name="response" numFound="1" start="0"> <doc> <str name="ex">samsung spinpoint p spn hard drive gb ata</str> <str name="id">SP2514N</str> <str name="description">Samsung SpinPoint12 P120 SP2514N - hard drive - 250 GB - ATA-133</str> </doc> </result> But when I'm searching this doc, I got this: <result name="response" numFound="1" start="0"> <doc> <str name="ex">Samsung SpinPoint12 P120 SP2514N - hard drive - 250 GB - ATA-133</str> <str name="id">SP2514N</str> <str name="description">Samsung SpinPoint12 P120 SP2514N - hard drive - 250 GB - ATA-133</str> </doc> </result> As you can see "description" and "ex" filed are identical. The result of filter chain wasn't actually stored in the "ex" filed :( Anyway, thank you :) FT> -Todd FT> -----Original Message----- FT> From: Aleksey Gogolev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] FT> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 9:24 AM FT> To: Feak, Todd FT> Subject: Re[2]: Question about copyField FT> Thanks for reply. I want to make your point more exact, cause I'm not FT> sure that I correctly understood you :) FT> As far as I know (correct me please, if I wrong) type defines the way FT> in which the field is indexed and queried. But I don't want to index FT> or query "suggestion" field in different way, I want "suggestion" field FT> store different value (like in example I wrote in first mail). FT> So you are saying that I can tell to slor (using filedType) how solr FT> should process string before saving it? Yes? FT>> The filters and tokenizer that are applied to the copy field are FT>> determined by it's type in the schema. Simply create a new field FT> type in FT>> your schema with the filters you would like, and use that type for FT> your FT>> copy field. So, the field description would have it's old type, but FT> the FT>> field suggestion would get a new type. FT>> -Todd Feak FT>> -----Original Message----- FT>> From: Aleksey Gogolev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] FT>> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 8:28 AM FT>> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org FT>> Subject: Question about copyField FT>> Hello. FT>> I have field "description" in my schema. And I want make a filed FT>> "suggestion" with the same content. So I added following line to my FT>> schema.xml: FT>> <copyField source="description" dest="suggestion"/> FT>> But I also want to modify "description" string before copying it to FT>> "suggestion" field. I want to remove all comas, dots and slashes. FT> Here FT>> is an example of such transformation: FT>> "TvPL/st, SAMSUNG, SML200" => "TvPL st SAMSUNG SML200" FT>> And so as result I want to have such doc: FT>> <doc> FT>> <field name="id">8asydauf9nbcngfaad</filed> FT>> <field name="description">TvPL/st, SAMSUNG, SML200</filed> FT>> <field name="description">TvPL st SAMSUNG SML200</filed> FT>> </doc> FT>> I think it would be nice to use solr.PatternReplaceFilterFactory for FT>> this purpose. So the question is: Can I use solr filters for FT>> processing "description" string before copying it to "suggestion" FT>> field? FT>> Thank you for your attention. -- Aleksey Gogolev developer, dev.co.ua Aleksey mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
