Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 10109 invoked from network); 18 Apr 2008 02:14:09 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Apr 2008 02:14:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 82523 invoked by uid 500); 18 Apr 2008 02:14:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-user-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 82485 invoked by uid 500); 18 Apr 2008 02:14:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact java-user-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list java-user@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 82474 invoked by uid 99); 18 Apr 2008 02:14:02 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:14:02 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [208.69.42.181] (HELO radix.cryptio.net) (208.69.42.181) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Apr 2008 02:13:20 +0000 Received: by radix.cryptio.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 7ABC171C32F; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:13:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by radix.cryptio.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7771D71C257 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:13:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:13:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Chris Hostetter To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Does LUCENE-831) "Complete overhaul of FieldCache API" provide fieldcache offloading to disk? In-Reply-To: <6BDB1005-1818-419D-9BAE-F8A671EB2274@mikemccandless.com> Message-ID: References: <16743559.post@talk.nabble.com> <1208440150.6498.10.camel@m-laptop> <16747733.post@talk.nabble.com> <1208457459.25541.17.camel@m-laptop> <6BDB1005-1818-419D-9BAE-F8A671EB2274@mikemccandless.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org : But then the FieldCache is just starting to feel alot like column-stride : fields : (LUCENE-1231). that's what i've been thinking ... my goal with LUCENE-831 was to make it easier to manage FieldCache and hopefully the norms[] as well particularly in the case of reopen ... but with column-stride fields the need for both of those might go away completely) that doesn't mean LUCENE-1231 won't still be usefull .. it could probably still be leveraged by things like CachingWrapperFilter, and some of the Solr caches to reduce the amount of work on reload -- i just don't know that FieldCache will really need to exist in the future. -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org