[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5189?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13757875#comment-13757875
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-5189:
-------------------------------------
{quote}
This would let us proceed (progress not perfection) and then later, we address
it. Ie, I think the added boolean is a fair compromise.
{quote}
Its not a fair compromise at all.
To me, as a search engine library, this is not progress. its going backwards.
Yes: I'm looking at it solely from an API perspective.
Yes: others look at things from only features/performance perspective and do
not seem to care about APIs.
But as a library, the API is all that matters.
So I just want to make it clear: saying "progress not perfection" is not a good
excuse for leaving broken APIs about the codebase and shoving in features as
fast as possible: its not progress to me so I simply do not see it that way.
Frankly I am tired of hearing this phrase being used in this way, and when I
see it in the future, it will encourage me to take a closer inspection of APIs
and do pickier reviews.
> Numeric DocValues Updates
> -------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-5189
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5189
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: core/index
> Reporter: Shai Erera
> Assignee: Shai Erera
> Attachments: LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch,
> LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch, LUCENE-5189.patch
>
>
> In LUCENE-4258 we started to work on incremental field updates, however the
> amount of changes are immense and hard to follow/consume. The reason is that
> we targeted postings, stored fields, DV etc., all from the get go.
> I'd like to start afresh here, with numeric-dv-field updates only. There are
> a couple of reasons to that:
> * NumericDV fields should be easier to update, if e.g. we write all the
> values of all the documents in a segment for the updated field (similar to
> how livedocs work, and previously norms).
> * It's a fairly contained issue, attempting to handle just one data type to
> update, yet requires many changes to core code which will also be useful for
> updating other data types.
> * It has value in and on itself, and we don't need to allow updating all the
> data types in Lucene at once ... we can do that gradually.
> I have some working patch already which I'll upload next, explaining the
> changes.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
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]
