Mailing List Archive

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9782>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9782

RangeQuery without lower term and inclusive=false skips blank fields

Summary: RangeQuery without lower term and inclusive=false skips
blank fields
Product: Lucene
Version: unspecified
Platform: Other
OS/Version: Other
Status: NEW
Severity: Normal
Priority: Other
Component: Search
AssignedTo: lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org
ReportedBy: otis@apache.org


This was reported by "James Ricci" <james@riccinursery.com> at:
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listName=lucene-user@jakarta.apache.org&msgNo=1835


When you create a ranged query and omit the lower term, my expectation
would be that I would find everything less than the upper term. Now if I pass
false for the inclusive term, then I would expect that I would find all
terms less than the upper term excluding the upper term itself.

What is happening in the case of lower_term=null, upper_term=x,
inclusive=false is that empty strings are being excluded because
inclusive is set false, and the implementation of RangedQuery creates a default
lower term of Term(fieldName, ""). Since it's not inclusive, it excludes "".
This isn't what I intended, and I don't think it's what most people would
imagine RangedQuery would do in the case I've mentioned.

I equate lower=null, upper=x, inclusive=false to Field < x. lower=null,
upper=x, inclusive=true would be Field <= x. In both cases, the only
difference should be whether or not Field = x is true for the query.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>