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-2665) Rework FieldCache to be more flexible/general
Date Thu, 23 Sep 2010 22:48:32 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2665?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12914270#action_12914270
] 

Ryan McKinley commented on LUCENE-2665:
---------------------------------------

While we are thinking about it... perhaps the best option is to add a Cache to the IndexReader
itself.

This would be nice since it would would drop the WeakHashMap<IndexReader> that is used
all over.  I just like hard references better!

The one (ok maybe there are more) hitch I can think of is that some Cache instances don't
care about deleted docs (FieldCache) and others do.  Perhaps the EntryCreator knows and the
Cache coud behave differently... or am i getting ahead of myself!




> Rework FieldCache to be more flexible/general
> ---------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-2665
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2665
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Ryan McKinley
>         Attachments: LUCENE-2665-FieldCacheOverhaul.patch
>
>
> The existing FieldCache implementation is very rigid and does not allow much flexibility.
 In trying to implement simple features, it points to much larger structural problems.
> This patch aims to take a fresh approach to how we work with the FieldCache.

-- 
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