From dev-return-359556-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@lucene.apache.org Tue Jun 18 15:53:03 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [207.244.88.153]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 5D03618066B for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 17:53:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 15795 invoked by uid 500); 18 Jun 2019 15:53:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 15670 invoked by uid 99); 18 Jun 2019 15:53:01 -0000 Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (HELO mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.139) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 15:53:01 +0000 Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (unknown [207.244.88.139]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 820E4E2DCF for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 15:53:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jira-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at jira-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 469F725415 for ; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 15:53:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 15:53:00 +0000 (UTC) From: "Adrien Grand (JIRA)" To: dev@lucene.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-8769) Range Query Type With Logically Connected Ranges MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8769?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16866782#comment-16866782 ] Adrien Grand commented on LUCENE-8769: -------------------------------------- It feels a bit wrong to me to implement support for AND and NOT this way: the next step I imagine will be support for OR, which shouldn't be any more complicated than the current patch. And any combination of AND/NOT/OR clauses can be rewritten to a combination of ranges that only have OR clauses? So it would feel more natural to start with OR, and then possibly add support for AND and NOT via rewrite rules. Another thing is that this feature feels useful but maybe a bit too esoteric for lucene/core, could we have it in the sandbox first? I suspect it'll make it hard to reuse the packing logic but in such a case it'd probably be fine to duplicate? > Range Query Type With Logically Connected Ranges > ------------------------------------------------ > > Key: LUCENE-8769 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8769 > Project: Lucene - Core > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: Atri Sharma > Priority: Major > Attachments: LUCENE-8769.patch, LUCENE-8769.patch, LUCENE-8769.patch > > > Today, we visit BKD tree for each range specified for PointRangeQuery. It would be good to have a range query type which can take multiple ranges logically ANDed or ORed. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org