[ 
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-761?page=comments#action_12461381 ] 
            
Grant Ingersoll commented on LUCENE-761:
----------------------------------------

Hi Michael,

I am not sure I understand why 755 blocks this one.  I would think it would be 
the other way around, that way we could integrate this into scoring and people 
could access it seamlessly w/o having to change their query code (except maybe 
the similarity, as I suggested, or by adding some other interface).  


-Grant

> Clone proxStream lazily in SegmentTermPositions
> -----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-761
>                 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-761
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Index
>            Reporter: Michael Busch
>         Assigned To: Michael Busch
>            Priority: Minor
>
> In SegmentTermPositions the proxStream should be cloned lazily, i. e. at the 
> first time nextPosition() is called. Then the initialization costs of 
> TermPositions are not higher anymore compared to TermDocs and thus there is 
> no reason anymore for Scorers to use TermDocs instead of TermPositions. In 
> fact, all Scorers should use TermPositions, because custom subclasses of 
> existing scorers might want to access payloads, which is only possible via 
> TermPositions. We could further merge SegmentTermDocs and 
> SegmentTermPositions into one class and deprecate the interface TermDocs.
> I'm going to attach a patch once the payloads feature (LUCENE-755) is 
> committed.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: 
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
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]

Reply via email to