lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Uwe Schindler (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-3312) Break out StorableField from IndexableField
Date Fri, 31 Aug 2012 11:39:11 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3312?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13445852#comment-13445852
] 

Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-3312:
---------------------------------------

bq. What if they were returned? Because you're absolutely right, it seems odd for DocValues
Fields to be StorableFields and then not accessible like all other StorableFields. So what
if we changed how IR.document worked so you could pull DocValues Fields too. Is that something
users might want?

This could be a large overhead if e.g. the loading of the whole column would be triggered
automatically (depends on configuration). Also, IndexReader.document() is in the basic IndexReader
class (because stored fields can always be returned, also for composite readers). DocValues
is AtomicReader only... This could of course be managed by BaseCompositeReader to use the
subindex function to get the correct document, but it is somehow not the thing docvalues are
made for. They are there for using them while scoring, filtering, functions...
                
> Break out StorableField from IndexableField
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-3312
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3312
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          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-DocumentIterators-uwe.patch, lucene-3312-patch-01.patch,
lucene-3312-patch-02.patch, lucene-3312-patch-03.patch, lucene-3312-patch-04.patch, lucene-3312-patch-05.patch,
lucene-3312-patch-06.patch, lucene-3312-patch-07.patch, lucene-3312-patch-08.patch, lucene-3312-patch-09.patch,
lucene-3312-patch-10.patch, lucene-3312-patch-11.patch, lucene-3312-patch-12a.patch, lucene-3312-patch-12.patch,
lucene-3312-patch-13.patch, lucene-3312-patch-14.patch, LUCENE-3312-reintegration.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
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