lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bruce Ritchie <>
Subject Re: Caching filter wrapper (was Re: RE : DateFilter.Before/After)
Date Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:46:11 GMT
Erik Hatcher wrote:
> So, if there was a caching filter implemented like yours, but with the 
> WeakHashMap cache like QueryFilter, would you use it instead of what 
> you've done?  

I think it would depend on whether the cache key's are independant of IndexReaders (i.e. an

implementation that's not implemented in the same manner as the QueryFilter by using an IndexReader

as a cache key (or part thereof). This is because I open multiple IndexReaders against a single

index which would cause (false) cache misses. If that wasn't the case then I think I'd be
ok with 
using it, irregardless of my preference to use our own cache architecture. I'd definitely
use it if 
I could provide the backing map via a setMap() method or the like.

> I'm in agreement with you about where the caching should 
> be.  Would anyone object to such an implementation added to Lucene's core?

It's fine by me but I'm only one user :)


Bruce Ritchie

View raw message