lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Simon Willnauer (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-2662) BytesHash
Date Fri, 24 Sep 2010 20:07:33 GMT


Simon Willnauer commented on LUCENE-2662:

bq. In the class jdocs, I think state that this is basically a Map<BytesRef,int>?
yeah that simplifies it - will do.

bq. Maybe we also move ByteBlockPool --> oal.util?
yeah I did that already - that makes totally sense

bq. Maybe move out the ByteBlockAllocator to its own class (in util)? RecyclingByteBlockAllocator?
+1 yeah I like that - I also think we should allow to pass the blockpool to the byteshash
instead of the allocator. From what I can tell now I think this is necessary for the refactoring
anyway since we share pools with secondary TermsHash instances in the termvector case.

Maybe rename ords -> keys? And hash -> values? (The key isn't
really an "ord" (I think?) because it increases by more than 1
each time... it's more like an address since it references an
address in the byte-pool space).
yeah that depends how you see it - the array index really is the ord though. but I like those
names. I will change.

We should advertise the limits in the jdocs - limited to <= 2GB
total byte storage, each key must be <= BLOCK SIZE-2 in length.
I think I have done the latter already but I will add the other too.

Can we have sortedEntries() not allocate a new iterator object?
Ie, just return the sorted bytesStart int[]? (This is what's done
today, and, for term vectors on small docs, this method is pretty
hot). And the javadocs for this should be stronger - it's not
that the behaviour is undefined after, it's that you must .clear()
after you're done consume the sorted entries.
Ah I see - good point. I think what you refer to is   public int[] sort(Comparator<BytesRef>
comp) - the iterator one is just more convenient one. I will change though.

thanks mike!

> BytesHash
> ---------
>                 Key: LUCENE-2662
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Index
>    Affects Versions: Realtime Branch, 4.0
>            Reporter: Jason Rutherglen
>            Assignee: Simon Willnauer
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: Realtime Branch, 4.0
>         Attachments: LUCENE-2662.patch, LUCENE-2662.patch
> This issue will have the BytesHash separated out from LUCENE-2186

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