This seems really exotic feature to add a dedicated docvalues field for. We should let BINARY be the catchall for stuff like this.
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 10:17 PM Marc D'Mello <marcd2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Some background: I've been working on this PR to add hyper rectangle faceting > capabilities to Lucene facets and I needed to create a new doc values field > to support this feature. Initially, I had a field that just extended > BinaryDocValues, but then a discussion came up about whether to add a > completely new DocValues field, maybe something like PointDocValuesField (and > SortedPointDocValuesField as the multivalued version) to add first class > support for this new field. Here is the link to the discussion. I think there > are a few benefits to this: > > Formalize how we would store points as doc values rather than just packing > points into a BinaryDocValues field in a format that could change at any time > NumericDocValues enables us to create a SortedNumericDocValuesRange query > which can be used with IndexOrDocValuesQuery to make some range queries more > efficient. Adding this new doc values field would let us do the same thing > with higher dimensional ranges > > I'm sure I could be missing some benefits, and I also am not super > experienced with Lucene so there could be drawbacks I am missing as well :). > From what I understand though, Lucene doesn't have a lot of DocValues fields > and there should be some thought put into adding new ones, so I was wondering > if I could get some feedback about the idea. Thanks! --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
