lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Chris Male (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-3312) Break out StorableField from IndexableField
Date Fri, 01 Jun 2012 04:05:23 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3312?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13287136#comment-13287136
] 

Chris Male commented on LUCENE-3312:
------------------------------------

bq. index.Document is an interface, I think for better extensibility in the future it could
be an abstract class - who knows what we will want to put there in addition to the iterators...

I'm not sure that is such a big deal.  But I do think  should think about the name here. 
We already have Document and it's going to become confusing with two different Document classes
kind of doing the same thing and with document.Document implementing index.Document as well.

bq. previously we allowed one to remove fields from document by name, are we going to allow
this now separately for indexed and stored fields?

I think we need to simplify the document.Document API.  I don't think it should hold Indexable/StorableField
instances but instead should just hold Field instances.  It is a userland kind of class and
so is Field.  We should make it easy for people to add the Fields that they want.  If they
want to have a Field which is both indexed and stored, then they can create it once and add
it to Document.  If they want to do it separately, then they can do that too.  Since Field
implements both IndexableField and StorableField, it can serve the dual purpose.

That way the API in document.Document is pretty simple and you can add and remove things as
done in the past.
                
> Break out StorableField from IndexableField
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-3312
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3312
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: core/index
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>            Assignee: Nikola Tankovic
>              Labels: gsoc2012, lucene-gsoc-12
>             Fix For: Field Type branch
>
>         Attachments: lucene-3312-patch-01.patch, lucene-3312-patch-02.patch, lucene-3312-patch-03.patch,
lucene-3312-patch-04.patch
>
>
> In the field type branch we have strongly decoupled
> Document/Field/FieldType impl from the indexer, by having only a
> narrow API (IndexableField) passed to IndexWriter.  This frees apps up
> use their own "documents" instead of the "user-space" impls we provide
> in oal.document.
> Similarly, with LUCENE-3309, we've done the same thing on the
> doc/field retrieval side (from IndexReader), with the
> StoredFieldsVisitor.
> But, maybe we should break out StorableField from IndexableField,
> such that when you index a doc you provide two Iterables -- one for the
> IndexableFields and one for the StorableFields.  Either can be null.
> One downside is possible perf hit for fields that are both indexed &
> stored (ie, we visit them twice, lookup their name in a hash twice,
> etc.).  But the upside is a cleaner separation of concerns in API....

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
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