go into the change management search changes form. Go to the advanced search tab. Select Brief Description Select Contains as the comparison Enter as the value your string surrounded by one or two astersisk. Click Next Click the Search button For example *est* to look for "test", "Test", "testing", "attests" and so forth.
Here your SM 'IR search' comes in play. When you say that it should display all rfc where some word comes then you have to tell SM in which fields of CR it should look out. And this is controlled by table 'irfields' , you have to add all those field here. But this is not supposed(to add all fields) to do as it will impact the performance badly and irexpert search are very heavy.
So it s better to allow use of advance search.
____________________________________ Assign Kudo, if found post useful and mark it accepted if solves the issue.
If the title is IR Indexed (check the IR Key for the table), then searches againt title will be performed using that functionality. It already does stemming, relevancy, etc. and a wildcard search may not return the expected values.
Note that is is not possible to execute a search against only one of the fields in an IR Key. If title and description are IR indexed, they will be searched together. Removing title from the IR Key doesn't really address the issue, because then your question becomes "How do I perform a full table scan by having users do a wildcard search against the title field?" which is less than ideal.
For your example, if you were to try to search an IR indexed field for tes* you would likely get no results if that string is common to too many records. For example, I often have users demo IR by adding the word test repeatedly and searching for it. Then, one day, it stops working because too high a percentage of tickets include the word test and the word is automatically excluded from IR relevancy ranking.
Why do users need to do a wildcard search against the title field?
--If they are coding things in the title (e.g status, next action, follow up time), it is probably better to add a custom field to manage the functionality.