lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-2649) FieldCache should include a BitSet for matching docs
Date Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:57:32 GMT


Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-2649:

bq. Uwe, I think we need to keep the native arrays.

I think the API should allow for optional retrieval of the backing
array (and we should [manually, for today] specialize the sort
comparators), but primary access should be a method call eg
ByteValues.getValue(int docID).

Exactly. Maybe do it like with NIO buffers: they have methods hasArray(), array() and arrayOffset(),
the two last ones throw UnsupportedOp, if first is false. We already have quite a lot TopFieldDocCollectors
impls as inner classes, a few more choosen by hasArray()... haha :-)

> FieldCache should include a BitSet for matching docs
> ----------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-2649
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Search
>            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:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message