incubator-blur-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron McCurry <amccu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [incubator-blur] The new Adhoc command is working though there are a few things hard coded that need to be pulled into the API. (753ab41)
Date Thu, 31 Jul 2014 16:55:49 GMT
We could do that, however we likely would need a way to have the
implementation create a initial return object so that a merge could be
incremental.

For example:

Let's say that we are aggregating counts and we have a custom Counts object
and we are going to merge each Result as it finishes.

public Counts merge(Counts existing, Result result) {
  Counts mergedCounts= new Counts();
  // Do some counting and merging of existing Counts.
  return mergedCounts;
}

So we could do one of three things.  We could allow existing to be null if
it's the first merge call or we could have a second method that doesn't
take an existing argument.

public Counts inital(Result result) {
...
}

The last option I see is to use vargs like:

public Counts merge(Result result, Counts... existing) {
  Counts mergedCounts= new Counts();
  // Do some counting and merging of existing Counts.
  return mergedCounts;
}

This is at least a little cleaner in that it's implied that existing could
be absent or null as well as allowing multiple items to be merged are the
same time.

What do you think?

Aaron




On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Tim Williams <notifications@github.com>
wrote:

> Mostly curious if this comment ends up on the dev@ list... but I'm
> curious why buffer all results before calling merge? Seems like
> intermediate merging would be better?
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/apache/incubator-blur/commit/753ab411c3b3d1fc432b3de9335040274e2326a8#commitcomment-7222462>
> .
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message