lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com>
Subject Re: Payloads and TrieRangeQuery
Date Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:01:05 GMT
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Yonik Seeley<yonik@lucidimagination.com> wrote:

> Really goes into Solr land... my pref for Lucene is to remain a core
> expert-level full-text search library and keep out things that are
> easy to do in an application or at another level.

I think this must be the crux of our disagreement.

I feel, instead, that Lucene should stand on its own, as a useful
search library, with a consumable API, good defaults, etc.  Lucene is
more than "the expert level search API that's embedded in
Solr". Lucene is consumed directly by apps other than Solr.

In fact, I think there are many things in Solr that naturally belong
in Lucene (and over time we've been gradually slurping them down).
The line/criteria has always been rather blurry...

In Lucene, we should be able to add a NumericField to a document,
index it, and then create RangeFilter or Sort on that field and have
things "just work".

Unfortunately, we are far from being able to do so today.  We can (and
should, for 2.9) make baby steps towards this, by aborbing trie* into
core, but you're still gonna have to "just know" to make the specific
FieldCache parser and specific NumericRangeQuery to match how you
indexed.  It's awkward and not consumable, but I think it'll just have to
do for now...

Mike

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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