lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shai Erera <ser...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Extending Sort/FieldCache
Date Wed, 09 Sep 2009 03:46:24 GMT
I didn't say we won't need CSF, but that at least conceptually, CSF and my
sort-by-payload are the same. If however it turns out that CSF performs
better, then I'll definitely switch my sort-by-payload package to use it. I
thought that CSF is going to be implemented using payloads, but perhaps I'm
wrong.

Shai

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:39 AM, Yonik Seeley <yonik@lucidimagination.com>wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 4:42 AM, Shai Erera<serera@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I've resisted using payloads for this purpose in Solr because it felt
> >> like an interim hack until CSF is implemented.
> >
> > I don't see it as a hack, but as a proper use of a great feature in
> Lucene.
>
> It's proper use for an application perhaps, but not for core Lucene.
> Applications are pretty much required to work with what's given in
> Lucene... but Lucene developers can make better choices.  Hence if at
> all possible, work should be put into implementing CSF rather than
> sorting by payloads.
>
> > CSF and this are essentially the same.
>
> In which case we wouldn't need CSF?
>
> -Yonik
> http://www.lucidimagination.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message