[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2846?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12979331#action_12979331
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-2846:
-------------------------------------
an alternative to totally clear up the faking here that mike thought of:
If we can somehow differentiate between omitNorms (null), and 'doesnt have
field' (say, exception),
we wouldn't need to fake. In multinorms we could then safely return null if any
reader returns null,
but throw an exception if all readers throw an exception.
> omitTF is viral, but omitNorms is anti-viral.
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2846
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2846
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-2846.patch
>
>
> omitTF is viral. if you add document 1 with field "foo" as omitTF, then
> document 2 has field "foo" without omitTF, they are both treated as omitTF.
> but omitNorms is the opposite. if you have a million documents with field
> "foo" with omitNorms, then you add just one document without omitting norms,
> now you suddenly have a million 'real norms'.
> I think it would be good for omitNorms to be viral too, just for consistency,
> and also to prevent huge byte[]'s.
> but another option is to make omitTF anti-viral, which is more "schemaless" i
> guess.
--
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
