lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1673) Move TrieRange to core
Date Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:29:07 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12719729#action_12719729
] 

Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1673:
---------------------------------------

bq. Did you think about / decide against making a NumericField (that'd set the right tokenStream
itself)?

The problem currently is:
- Field is final and so I must extend AbstractField. But some methods of Document return Field
and not AbstractField.
- NumericField would only work for indexing, but when retrieving from index (stored fields),
it would change to Field.

Maybe we should move this after the index-specific schemas and so on. Or document, that it
can be only used for indexing.

By the way: How do you like the factories in NumericRangeQuery and the setValue methods, working
like StringBuffer.append() in NumericTokenStream? This makes it really easy to index.

The only good thing of NumericField would be the possibility to automatically disable TF and
Norms per default when indexing.

> Move TrieRange to core
> ----------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1673
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Search
>    Affects Versions: 2.9
>            Reporter: Uwe Schindler
>            Assignee: Uwe Schindler
>             Fix For: 2.9
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-1673.patch, LUCENE-1673.patch
>
>
> TrieRange was iterated many times and seems stable now (LUCENE-1470, LUCENE-1582, LUCENE-1602).
There is lots of user interest, Solr added it to its default FieldTypes (SOLR-940) and if
possible I want to move it to core before release of 2.9.
> Before this can be done, there are some things to think about:
> # There are now classes called LongTrieRangeQuery, IntTrieRangeQuery, how should they
be called in core? I would suggest to leave it as it is. On the other hand, if this keeps
our only numeric query implementation, we could call it LongRangeQuery, IntRangeQuery or NumericRangeQuery
(see below, here are problems). Same for the TokenStreams and Filters.
> # Maybe the pairs of classes for indexing and searching should be moved into one class:
NumericTokenStream, NumericRangeQuery, NumericRangeFilter. The problem here: ctors must be
able to pass int, long, double, float as range parameters. For the end user, mixing these
4 types in one class is hard to handle. If somebody forgets to add a L to a long, it suddenly
instantiates a int version of range query, hitting no results and so on. Same with other types.
Maybe accept java.lang.Number as parameter (because nullable for half-open bounds) and one
enum for the type.
> # TrieUtils move into o.a.l.util? or document or?
> # Move TokenStreams into o.a.l.analysis, ShiftAttribute into o.a.l.analysis.tokenattributes?
Somewhere else?
> # If we rename the classes, should Solr stay with Trie (because there are different impls)?
> # Maybe add a subclass of AbstractField, that automatically creates these TokenStreams
and omits norms/tf per default for easier addition to Document instances?

-- 
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


Mime
View raw message