[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5495?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13922940#comment-13922940
]
Lei Wang edited comment on LUCENE-5495 at 3/6/14 7:35 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------
{noformat}
+ public BitsDocIdSet(Bits bits, int length) {
+ this.bits = bits;
+ this.length = length;
+ }
{noformat}
We can assert bits is not a DocIdSet here. if it is, this adds overhead only.
{noformat}
+ final List<Bits> mustBitsList = new ArrayList<Bits>();
+ final List<Bits> mustNotBitsList = new ArrayList<Bits>();
{noformat}
May need a SHOULD list also?
{noformat}
+ if (bits != null) {
+ mustNotBitsList.add(bits);
+ }
{noformat}
if bits is already a FixedBitSet or OpenBitSet, merge them into res might be
faster? same for other lists
was (Author: wonlay):
+ public BitsDocIdSet(Bits bits, int length) {
+ this.bits = bits;
+ this.length = length;
+ }
We can assert bits is not a DocIdSet here. if it is, this adds overhead only.
+ final List<Bits> mustBitsList = new ArrayList<Bits>();
+ final List<Bits> mustNotBitsList = new ArrayList<Bits>();
May need a SHOULD list also?
+ if (bits != null) {
+ mustNotBitsList.add(bits);
+ }
if bits is already a FixedBitSet or OpenBitSet, merge them into res might be
faster? same for other lists
> Boolean Filter does not handle FilterClauses with only bits() implemented
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-5495
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5495
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core/search
> Affects Versions: 4.6.1
> Reporter: John Wang
> Attachments: LUCENE-5495.patch
>
>
> Some Filter implementations produce DocIdSets without the iterator()
> implementation, such as o.a.l.facet.range.Range.getFilter().
> Currently, such filters cannot be added to a BooleanFilter because
> BooleanFilter expects all FilterClauses with Filters that have iterator()
> implemented.
> This patch improves the behavior by taking Filters with bits() implemented
> and treat them separately.
> This behavior would be faster in the case for Filters with a forward index as
> the underlying data structure, where there would be no need to scan the index
> to build an iterator.
> See attached unit test, which fails without this patch.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
