lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ryan McKinley (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-2649) FieldCache should include a BitSet for matching docs
Date Wed, 22 Sep 2010 18:12:32 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2649?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12913695#action_12913695
] 

Ryan McKinley commented on LUCENE-2649:
---------------------------------------

bq. Regardless of if there is a separate getBits(field), I think we should add/use ByteValues,
IntValues, etc. It's just so much more extensible going forward.

If we have a separate getBits( field ) call, should the Bits be added to the XxxValues class?
 I suspect not.

 


> FieldCache should include a BitSet for matching docs
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-2649
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2649
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Ryan McKinley
>             Fix For: 4.0
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch, LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch,
LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch, LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch, LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch
>
>
> The FieldCache returns an array representing the values for each doc.  However there
is no way to know if the doc actually has a value.
> This should be changed to return an object representing the values *and* a BitSet for
all valid docs.

-- 
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: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message