14 messages in org.apache.jackrabbit.usersRe: AW: AW: another search question ...
FromSent OnAttachments
KÖLL ClausOct 17, 2007 2:26 am 
Norbert DreisiebnerOct 17, 2007 2:44 am 
KÖLL ClausOct 17, 2007 2:50 am 
KÖLL ClausOct 18, 2007 10:06 pm 
Jukka ZittingOct 19, 2007 1:23 am 
Julian ReschkeOct 19, 2007 1:49 am 
David NueschelerOct 19, 2007 2:03 am 
KÖLL ClausOct 21, 2007 10:24 pm 
Julian ReschkeOct 22, 2007 3:42 am 
Jukka ZittingOct 22, 2007 4:08 am 
KÖLL ClausOct 22, 2007 4:59 am 
Ard SchrijversOct 22, 2007 5:44 am 
Marcel ReuteggerOct 23, 2007 7:29 am 
Marcel ReuteggerOct 23, 2007 7:33 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:Re: AW: AW: another search question ...Actions...
From:Julian Reschke (juli@gmx.de)
Date:Oct 22, 2007 3:42:57 am
List:org.apache.jackrabbit.users

KÖLL Claus wrote:

The use case comes from working with jackrabbit.

we have a business facade in front of jackrabbit and there is a method to receive a file node by its uuid and one to search within jackrabbit.

we store the uuids in our application and colleague at work had more files to receive and he wants not to call the method to receive the
file node for every uuid so he tries to search with a contains for the uuid's, and from that comes the
question.

a fulltext search for uuid's is absolutly no must for us and we also changed the
method to get file nodes for more uuids ...

i only want to know why it does not work as jukka find in the code ?

BR claus

Well, you still don't need a full text search, even if you have a *set* of UUIDs. Just use "or".

Best regards, Julian