Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id A243A200C5D for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:54:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id A0DFA160B97; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 06:54:31 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id E8F36160B93 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 08:54:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 48543 invoked by uid 500); 7 Apr 2017 06:54:29 -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 48531 invoked by uid 99); 7 Apr 2017 06:54:29 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Apr 2017 06:54:29 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 0864C181815 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 06:54:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.397 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.397 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, KAM_NUMSUBJECT=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.796, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IoXJ0osnNQE7 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 06:54:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io0-f176.google.com (mail-io0-f176.google.com [209.85.223.176]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 776455F1E9 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 06:54:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f176.google.com with SMTP id t68so10437778iof.0 for ; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 23:54:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=aSlGi99MnDFLqXrARFHUyZLgMPHBC9ULh9LmHW53kp8=; b=cmXe7ovsZnHBfrZ67NTmU2fbUr1WtDdKsiS4v7jwPeCgjqEuuzW1jDQQ4j/AqkMFWz M4Xmb0SIh7ZKAr5iHScdEYmPA/Dqmq77qWSzFogNP0vCfGOr+4bfckOzKK4EGiu3qI55 /ovvtwUN/Ca7OE2CdoXVuXfrgeTfLyn9NHAtqe5qDWhSiEAcOu6XSiSLXUGieByuTBd9 mK9seWEdadUDjnaVE0v+KkhaxjEhRuMBwv5Z0ALy980tYomG5dfvlC2etbzw4/WqgPGT ig+GZmM3CjRqqcaW9b6l/kJ2JgN/KPzxASVoshR+p3h2Y5uBn0hi5ySg0Tc7VISnPGC8 ir7g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=aSlGi99MnDFLqXrARFHUyZLgMPHBC9ULh9LmHW53kp8=; b=BaxgYrLuoE/za4eE66I+ynIBCKBh0sN4qye/a0YgmZbhiueT26oh3N9a0NsHNchOH1 5L64T3gQmx7nHiiCTz5nkrgIEDY5fchH2vzNNYt/q59EFtp0NX5UWS5lR8SsWpzhb0d7 TETbwLuweFkoSl4ZSHyFT0j3LBB3+nt3DtJ5EmvP0F5rPanfJFq2Os4gTRMLXTcjap4Z pNZ0URUwrWHfdYdYUEu8F1zoyyJvbqmfyo9sn1FAMAhM43jOBb4CXyeeECDTOXn5EH29 b3dE+8cyXMkF3/t6Y2EuKQ3UF+bvNR3a0lTx6znsyKBjyUujPsOH9nAsqsPs96Rda+6H +ohw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H1kUCLojwrU4jlemfbQn2HBS68146rhLS+27gPsTSZQ/w9WBBAcqHShRgCkp9NcxA1t6nUAilfooBC3cA== X-Received: by 10.107.171.67 with SMTP id u64mr36742929ioe.102.1491548063282; Thu, 06 Apr 2017 23:54:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.137.89 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 23:54:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: aravinth thangasami Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 12:24:22 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Indexing Numeric value in Lucene 4.10.4 To: java-user@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c059e147a3dc1054c8e186e archived-at: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 06:54:31 -0000 --94eb2c059e147a3dc1054c8e186e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 we don't have to sort on that field So that we thought of that approach Thanks for your opinion will consider improving precision step Kind regards, Aravinth On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Erick Erickson wrote: > bq: What are your opinions on this? > > That this is not a sound approach. Why do you think Trie is expensive? > What evidence do you have at all for that? Strings are significantly > expensive relative to numeric fields. Plus, you can adjust the > precision step to reduce the "overhead" of a trie field. > > I very strongly doubt that the index would be smaller with strings. > I'm certain comparisons would be slower. I really can't come up with > much of any reason why strings would be better. > > Not to mention that sorting won't work unless you left-pad with zeros. > > Best, > Erick > > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 6:32 AM, aravinth thangasami > wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm searching numeric value and will not perform range query on that > field > > I thought of indexing it as String field instead of NumericField > > so that it will improve indexing time by avoiding numeric tries > > > > What are your opinions on this? > > > > > > Kind regards, > > Aravinth > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org > > --94eb2c059e147a3dc1054c8e186e--