lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-3345) docvalues FNFE
Date Wed, 27 Jul 2011 13:23:09 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3345?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13071711#comment-13071711
] 

Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-3345:
-------------------------------------

This flag can be per-segment right?

Another idea is, if the flag is important to docvalues, we write it into fieldinfos.
we decided to make docvalues a part of core, and I think this would make better sense.

I don't like the way this works today, we are out of normal field bits (I used the last one
for LUCENE-2048), but docvalues adds a whole 'type byte' that is always written, when in the
majority of causes there won't even be a docvalues.

I think instead, we should add a second 'type byte', and the first flag is 'hasDocValues',
if this is true, then there is follow-on byte for docvalues flags, which could include this
one.

I will open an issue.


> docvalues FNFE
> --------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-3345
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3345
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Robert Muir
>            Assignee: Simon Willnauer
>
> I created a test for LUCENE-3335, and it found an unrelated bug in docvalues.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

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


Mime
View raw message