lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-2309) Fully decouple IndexWriter from analyzers
Date Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:24:27 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2309?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12844180#action_12844180
] 

Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-2309:
-------------------------------------

{quote}
Or remove them entirely (but, then, core tests will need to use
contrib analyzers for their testing)...
{quote}

I agree, lets not get caught up on how our tests run from build.xml!
We should decouple analysis from IW as much as possible, at least to support 
more flexible analysis: e.g. someone doesnt want to use the TokenStream 
concept at all, for example.

I don't really have any opinion practically where all the analyzers go, but I do agree
it would be nice if they were in one place. For example, in contrib/analyzers now
we have analyzers by language, and in most cases, users should really be looking
at EnglishAnalyzer as their "default" instead of StandardAnalyzer for English language,
as it does Porter stemming, too.


> Fully decouple IndexWriter from analyzers
> -----------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-2309
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2309
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Index
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>
> IndexWriter only needs an AttributeSource to do indexing.
> Yet, today, it interacts with Field instances, holds a private
> analyzers, invokes analyzer.reusableTokenStream, has to deal with a
> wide variety (it's not analyzed; it is analyzed but it's a Reader,
> String; it's pre-analyzed).
> I'd like to have IW only interact with attr sources that already
> arrived with the fields.  This would be a powerful decoupling -- it
> means others are free to make their own attr sources.
> They need not even use any of Lucene's analysis impls; eg they can
> integrate to other things like [OpenPipeline|http://www.openpipeline.org].
> Or make something completely custom.
> LUCENE-2302 is already a big step towards this: it makes IW agnostic
> about which attr is "the term", and only requires that it provide a
> BytesRef (for flex).
> Then I think LUCENE-2308 would get us most of the remaining way -- ie, if the
> FieldType knows the analyzer to use, then we could simply create a
> getAttrSource() method (say) on it and move all the logic IW has today
> onto there.  (We'd still need existing IW code for back-compat).

-- 
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