Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Message-ID: <627699954.1206276445057.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2008 05:47:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Mark Miller (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-831) Complete overhaul of FieldCache
 API/Implementation
In-Reply-To: <19567919.1173857169285.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-831?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12581375#action_12581375 ] 

Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-831:
------------------------------------

Right, I think its used in MultiSearcher and Parallel-MultSearcher and I believe its because you cannot compare simple ord arrays across Searchers and so you need the original sort term?

I havn't been able to come up with anything that would be very efficient for merging a StringIndex, but I have not thought to much about it yet. Anyone out there have any ideas? Fastest way to merge two String[], each with an int[] indexing into the String[]? Is there a *really* fast way?

I agree that it would be nice to skip the String[] if a MultiSearcher was not being used.

I'll keep playing with it

> Complete overhaul of FieldCache API/Implementation
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-831
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-831
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Search
>            Reporter: Hoss Man
>            Assignee: Michael Busch
>             Fix For: 2.4
>
>         Attachments: fieldcache-overhaul.032208.diff, fieldcache-overhaul.diff, fieldcache-overhaul.diff
>
>
> Motivation:
> 1) Complete overhaul the API/implementation of "FieldCache" type things...
>     a) eliminate global static map keyed on IndexReader (thus
>         eliminating synch block between completley independent IndexReaders)
>     b) allow more customization of cache management (ie: use 
>         expiration/replacement strategies, disk backed caches, etc)
>     c) allow people to define custom cache data logic (ie: custom
>         parsers, complex datatypes, etc... anything tied to a reader)
>     d) allow people to inspect what's in a cache (list of CacheKeys) for
>         an IndexReader so a new IndexReader can be likewise warmed. 
>     e) Lend support for smarter cache management if/when
>         IndexReader.reopen is added (merging of cached data from subReaders).
> 2) Provide backwards compatibility to support existing FieldCache API with
>     the new implementation, so there is no redundent caching as client code
>     migrades to new API.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org