[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17243150#comment-17243150 ]
Mayya Sharipova commented on LUCENE-9628: ----------------------------------------- [~jtibshirani] Thank you for raising these very good issues. I agree with you and [~jpountz] about switching to a check of `ScoreMode#isExhaustive == false` instead of just `scoreMode == ScoreMode.TOP_SCORES` in `BooleanWeight`. I will address this. --- About `ConstantScoreQuery`: * I will see how we can addressed `TOP_DOCS` case as well without using `COMPLETE_NO_SCORES` for `innerWeight` all the time. * agree with [~jpountz] that we can improve javadoc of `ScoreMode` > Make sure to account for ScoreMode.TOP_DOCS in queries > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: LUCENE-9628 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9628 > Project: Lucene - Core > Issue Type: Test > Components: core/search > Reporter: Julie Tibshirani > Priority: Minor > > I noticed a few places where we are directly check the {{ScoreMode}} type > that should perhaps be generalized. These could affect whether numeric sort > optimization is applied: > * In {{BooleanWeight#bulkScorer}}, we check if score mode is {{TOP_SCORES}} > and if so, force non-bulk scoring. Should we expand this to include modes > like {{TOP_DOCS}}? > * In {{ConstantScoreQuery}}, we create the delegate weight with a hardcoded > {{COMPLETE_NO_SCORES}}. I'm not sure it actually causes problems, but it > seems like this doesn't handle {{TOP_DOCS}} correctly. > Apologies this issue isn’t more precise – I am not up-to-speed on the numeric > sort optimization but wanted to raise these in case they’re helpful. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org