SortField.INT / SortField.FLOAT inconsistency with DocValues
------------------------------------------------------------
Key: LUCENE-3192
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3192
Project: Lucene - Java
Issue Type: Wish
Reporter: Uwe Schindler
When reviewing sorting by DocValues I found the following naming inconsistency,
which shoulc be fixed.
# DocValues are always Longs or Doubles, but it uses SortField.INT and
SortField.FLOAT
# If you enable docValues in SortField but not use not SortField.INT /
SortField.FLOAT, it will use FieldCache without informing the user e.g. by
Exception
\\I would wish to fix this in any of the following ways:
- as a comment TODO notes, create new types for docvalues and remove
UseDocValues setter: SortField.INT_DOCVALUES, Sort.FLOAT_DOCVALUES (using the
naming INT/FLOAT from the general DOCVALUES API). Ideally there should be also
Sort.BYTESREF_DOCVALUES ? This would be more consistent, as getCompataor would
be only a big switch as it was before.
- use more "correct" SortField.LONG and SortField.DOUBLE and throw Exception if
doc values is enabled, but a totally different SortField type is used. The
Exception can be thrown in SortField.getComparator(). A second problem with
SortField.INT instead of LONG is that when you request sort values to be filled
into FieldDocs, the type there is suddenly Long, that may be totally confusing.
- make SortField.LONG==SortField.INT(maybe also ==BYTE==SHORT) use also
docvalues if enabled by using the same comparator. If DocValues incompatible
type is used, throw Ex in getComparator()
I would prefer solution #1, especially as I dont like SortField to be
modifiable (useDocValues setter...). Solution #2 is also fine.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
