[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2649?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12913795#action_12913795
]
J.J. Larrea commented on LUCENE-2649:
-------------------------------------
{quote}
Actually, that's major - otherwise I would have already just done that and
stored it in a separate cache for Solr's needs.
{quote}
Is the one-time-per-IndexReader-lifecycle cost of multiplying the cache load
time by some factor < 2.0 (since the term values don't need to be decoded),
really so terrible that one has to contemplate global state variables, or a
constant increase in cache memory, or significant API changes, or the potential
for double-allocation (with then an additional 1x cache load time), or
increased code complexity, ...? Even with all the lovely Solr support for
parallel pre-warming?
> FieldCache should include a BitSet for matching docs
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2649
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2649
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Ryan McKinley
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch,
> LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch,
> LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch,
> LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch, LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch
>
>
> The FieldCache returns an array representing the values for each doc.
> However there is no way to know if the doc actually has a value.
> This should be changed to return an object representing the values *and* a
> BitSet for all valid docs.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
