lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Willnauer <simon.willna...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: FYI: Javadoc update needed re: omitTf
Date Mon, 03 Jan 2011 19:03:55 GMT
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com> wrote:
>  /** Expert:
>  *
>  * If set, omit term freq, positions and payloads from
>  * postings for this field.
>  *
>  * <p><b>NOTE</b>: While this option reduces storage space
>  * required in the index, it also means any query
>  * requiring positional information, such as {@link
>  * PhraseQuery} or {@link SpanQuery} subclasses will
>  * silently fail to find results.
>  */
>
>
> Perhaps should say, *may* silently fail? SpanTermQuery will explicitly throw an exception.
Does PhraseQuery still silently fail these days?

I think if we can we should make all queries fail if they need
positions and they are not there. IMO its illegal to run such a query
on a field without positions. Maybe I miss something but we should be
able to make them fail all the time, right?
While we are on it, would it make sense to move omitTfAP into the
Index enum. It always felt odd that you can omit norms using the enum
but use a setter to omit TF & Pos.

simon

>
> - Mark
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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


Mime
View raw message