lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mark Miller (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1749) FieldCache introspection API
Date Sat, 01 Aug 2009 14:35:14 GMT


Mark Miller commented on LUCENE-1749:

bq . Ie we want it to share as much of the code path as possible with how searching was in
fact done

Well of course ;) I was a bit hazy on explain, so for some reason I had it in my head that
you would have to combine the explanations from multiple subreaders - but of course its a
doc at a time, so the doc will only come from one subreader, and the sim/weight will be top
level. So easy peasy fix. That boolean valuesFromSubReaders def had some code smell - just
didn't have an alternative at the moment - fix then improve !

I'll leave the 'explain at multiple levels' for another issue - I havn't even started thinking
about this issue yet - I prefer to code :) Which is kind of an oxymoron.

i don't have the code in front of me, but i thought i was adding the sub
readers to the list it's iterating over, so it will eventually recurse all
the way to the bottom.{quote}

Ah right, sorry about the false alarm. One of the few times I've seen .size() in a for loop
where its actually needed ;)

> FieldCache introspection API
> ----------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-1749
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Search
>            Reporter: Hoss Man
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 2.9
>         Attachments: fieldcache-introspection.patch, LUCENE-1749-hossfork.patch, LUCENE-1749.patch,
LUCENE-1749.patch, LUCENE-1749.patch, LUCENE-1749.patch, LUCENE-1749.patch, LUCENE-1749.patch,
LUCENE-1749.patch, LUCENE-1749.patch
> FieldCache should expose an Expert level API for runtime introspection of the FieldCache
to provide info about what is in the FieldCache at any given moment.  We should also provide
utility methods for sanity checking that the FieldCache doesn't contain anything "odd"...
>    * entries for the same reader/field with different types/parsers
>    * entries for the same field/type/parser in a reader and it's subreader(s)
>    * etc...

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:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message