[rt-users] Search engine

[Ruslan Zakirov]

I think it's probably good to treat word + number as (subject =~ "word" and
subject =~ "number") or (subject =~ "word" and id = number). However, as
mentioned quoting number is workaround in the current versions.


On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Bart <bart at pleh.info> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I've reproduced your problem using RT 4.0.8 using the quick search, since
> I'm assuming this is where your trying this query?
>
> When you use the quotes it treats the search argument as a string, when
> you enter just a number it searches for that ticket ID.
> So if you want to search for a number (just a number) you use quotes to
> stop RT from looking for a ticket ID.
>
> So far the above scenario is kinda what they mention on the search page:
>
> Search for tickets by entering *id* numbers, subject words *"in quotes"*,
>> *queues* by name, Owners by *username*, Requestors by *email address*,
>> and ticket *statuses*.
>> Any word not recognized by RT is searched for in ticket subjects.
>> Entering *initial*, *active*, *inactive*, or *any* limits results to
>> tickets with one of the respective types of statuses. Any individual status
>> name limits results to just the statuses named.
>> Start the search term with the name of a supported field followed by a
>> colon, as in *queue:"Example Queue"* and *owner:email at example.com*, to
>> explicitly specify the search type.
>> CFs may be searched using a similar syntax as above with *cf.Name:value*.
>> For the full power of RT's searches, please visit the search builder
>> interface <https://rt.bkwi.nl/Search/Build.html>.
>
>
> But in this case, you search for a word + number. I'd personally expect RT
> to treat that entire phrase as a string, so this might be a bug?
>
> Though on the other hand, the above text from the search page clearly
> states that subject words should be "in quotes". Which might mean that this
> is by design.
>
> Anyways, personally I agree with you and I'd expect a different behaviur
> in this situaiton.
>
> But I don't know exactly how this part "should" work, so maybe someone
> from bestpractical could drop a line on "this is by design" or "this is a
> bug"?
>
> --
> Bart G.
>
>
> 2013/4/11 Явор Маринов <ymarinov at neterra.net>
>
>> Forgot to mension - we are using RT 4.0.10
>>
>>
>>  Hello,
>>>
>>> Any comments regards this will be much appreciated because this is
>>> critical issue for us. Once you search from the search engine (for example
>>> vlan 90) nothing is displayed as results. However if you try to search for
>>> "vlan 90" correct results are displayed. So far, this is a big issue,
>>> because my colleagues from Support department should know the exact phrase
>>> of the subject of the ticket or their ID which is quite frustrating. Is
>>> there any work around or probably an addon for RT which should enable
>>> "this" type of search.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>


-- 
Best regards, Ruslan.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bestpractical.com/pipermail/rt-users/attachments/20130411/e32ec252/attachment.htm>