Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Message-ID: <855760706.1244752327335.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:32:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Michael McCandless (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1685) Make the Highlighter use SpanScorer
 by default
In-Reply-To: <987824461.1244749807375.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-1685?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12718629#action_12718629 ] 

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1685:
--------------------------------------------

bq. Make the Highlighter use SpanScorer by default

+1!

bq. I think it makes sense as the default in Solr as well, and I mentioned that back when it was put in, but alas, its an option there as well.

+1

bq. It has never been listed in a changes entry and its not in LIA 1, so you pretty much have to stumble upon it, and figure out what its for.

And... in working on LIA2, I had to ask for help on how to use it ;)

Consumability is important.

Can we do this for 2.9?

I think not being buggy by default (w/ PhraseQuery, eg) is far more important that a small loss in performance.  Performance is secondary to correctness.

> Make the Highlighter use SpanScorer by default
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1685
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1685
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Mark Miller
>            Assignee: Mark Miller
>            Priority: Minor
>
> I've always thought this made sense, but frankly, it took me a year to get the SpanScorer included with Lucene at all, so I was pretty much ready to move on after I it got in, rather than push for it as a default.
> I think it makes sense as the default in Solr as well, and I mentioned that back when it was put in, but alas, its an option there as well.
> The Highlighter package has no back compat req, but custom has been conservative - one reason I havn't pushed for this change before. Might be best to actually make the switch in 3? I could go either way - as is, I know a bunch of people use it, but I'm betting its the large minority. It has never been listed in a changes entry and its not in LIA 1, so you pretty much have to stumble upon it, and figure out what its for.
> I'll point out again that its just as fast as the standard scorer for any clause of a query that is not position sensitive. Position sensitive query clauses will obviously be somewhat slower to highlight, but that is because they will be highlighted correctly rather than ignoring position.

-- 
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