Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
From: "Uwe Schindler" <uwe@thetaphi.de>
To: <dev@lucene.apache.org>
References: <AANLkTim6MjccRDwp8DT-tTbG9JLE74A0GG8e48i0b=hz@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.1.10.1010281653220.28331@radix.cryptio.net>
 <AANLkTimY+rqbGJnAGEwyNP2OfiwhEGuAkYMF5GbY_5Qi@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.1.10.1010291032320.11189@radix.cryptio.net>
 <AANLkTikWg8HEgKz4_zOfZjgFTJj1MKv3dSMVAod-XOhe@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTikS27+hm5V_bkm13TBSeA_H-+K=b5S=HtyrsWdt@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTimf-muTMb4H16cKkDXDeTb_fEpG5ReGRDKLj54R@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTi=fgMAFcLeLLtLUeBN33ySBntYGx=rFLp_-QZZx@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTi=kLzsPEoJLN1rtxpxZmgFT7r8U8kGyWnhewQyW@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTi=eqwjJbouBmTcF9AaX_d8bpRKpu_xgo+qUr-DH@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTikDNhoMMAQ=c3aM9FXkaAMqsHHaoSN5dt1tfXXm@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikDNhoMMAQ=c3aM9FXkaAMqsHHaoSN5dt1tfXXm@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RE: inconsistency/performance trap of empty terms
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 16:49:32 +0200
Message-ID: <000e01cb7841$aa7dce50$ff796af0$@thetaphi.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Language: de
Thread-Index: 
 AQFSlYEDqmM+A+54SveYfakr8NaQMQN0Qj1ZAtQENzsC1fxWxQHZ4XaRAX5c9tIBiINlugKxn4g7Ai+HNfQB5T/vLgKJVnrek5Dh7fA=

+1, too. I hate those modes. In my opinion, we should not have analyzers =
at all (just my personal opinion). "new Field(name, TokenStream)" is =
much enough from consistency standpoint!

-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Muir [mailto:rcmuir@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2010 3:15 PM
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: inconsistency/performance trap of empty terms
>=20
> On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Earwin Burrfoot <earwin@gmail.com> =
wrote:
> > Speaking of consistency, I think NOT_ANALYZED is superfluous. Drop
> > this mode, and it can be safely reproduced by a NotAnalyzingAnalyzer
> > (insert better name here).
> >
>=20
> +1. This is confusing and comes up often on the user list.
>=20
> The way I think it happens is like this:
> Joe Schmoe, like a good user, just fires up StandardAnalyzer at both =
index and
> query time.
> Joe realizes he has a field that really shouldnt be tokenized, and =
sets it to
> NOT_ANALYZED.
> Joe is confused that queries dont work the way he should when he does =
this,
> since its still analyzed by the queryparser with StandardAnalyzer.
>=20
> It would be far better to force him to use PerFieldAnalyzerWrapper +
> NotAnalyzingAnalyzer or whatever, since then it would work =
intuitively.
> besides, if he sets this NotAnalyzed, it actually goes thru 'analysis'
> anyway: SingleTokenAttributeSource buried in the indexer.
> And, in trunk, this means things like UTF-8 encoding are assumed, but =
really
> this should be completely outside of the indexer.
>=20
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For =
additional
> commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


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