lucene-solr-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Hatcher <>
Subject Re: custom query response writer
Date Fri, 16 Jun 2006 11:12:32 GMT

On Jun 15, 2006, at 10:18 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
> On 6/15/06, Erik Hatcher <> wrote:
>> Having a way to hook into the response writing by leveraging the ever
>> improving Solr codebase and its utilities rather than copy/pasting
>> would be a nice way to aim, I think.
> It's a double edged sword.  Making more things public facilitates
> reuse, but constrains implementation and code evolution.  XMLWriter
> started out as implementation, not interface.

Those routines in XMLWriter are handy though, and are generally  
useful.  Under the covers they could still evolve.  I'm not proposing  
that we open up the internals of XMLWriter, just merely making it  
usable externally.

> For things like this, I'm OK with making it public if people are OK
> with updating their code if the class changes in the future.  It's
> seems like "expert" level usage as very few people will be writing
> their own custom response writers.

I'm not so sure about few people writing custom response writers.   
Its currently the best place to put in highlighting, and its also the  
best place for me to add in additional document data such as "more  
like this" and other related data (based on relationships to other  
documents).  And I also plan on exploring how some non-XML formats  
perform with a Ruby on Rails front-end, though in this case XMLWriter  
won't be of any use :)

> Also, there are some parts of XMLWriter (writeDate for instance) that
> we might want to move to the utils package since it would help the
> Java client.

Good point.

Personally I'm more than happy to adjust my projects code when Solr  
evolves.  I just did this the other day from my use of BitSet to  
OpenBitSet - it was not a big deal at all and very likely increased  
performance as well.  :)


View raw message