Could you not just have six different fields? If you wanted greater search efficiency, maybe you could try indexing them as described above, as strings. You could use the 'shingles' idea, for example, if you had: 11 22 33 44 55 66 as your numbers, index the terms:
11 11-22 11-22-33 11-22-33-44 11-22-33-44-55 11-22-33-44-55-66 as six values of a multivalued field. That way you can do an exact match on the first four values. If you then had the individual fields indexed as number-1 through number-6 you could do a search for 11-22-33-44 and a range query on number-5 and another on number-6. I'm not sure whether that would be more, or less performant than just having six numeric fields, though. Upayavira On Sat, Jan 19, 2013, at 12:44 PM, blopez wrote: > I'll always query on the set of 6 values, but in some cases, the matching > doesn't need to be exact. > > I mean, an usual query (you know, 6 integer values) could be exact > matching > for the first 4 values, but then a range for the other 2 values. > > What do u think would be the best way to face it? > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/n-values-in-one-fieldType-tp4034552p4034737.html > Sent from the Solr - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
