[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12483731
]
Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-584:
-------------------------------------
Otis:
> However, I need Sort and TopFieldDocs, and I don't see a match method with
> those.
> Is there a reason why such a match method is not in the patch?
A bit silly perhaps, but what sort criterion would like to have used when no
score() value is available?
I don't know the sorting code, but it might be possible to use a field value
for sorting.
In that case the sorting code for a Matcher would need to check whether the
sort criterion does
not imply the use of a score value.
I personally have no use for sorting by field values, so that is why I never
thought of combining this with a Matcher.
> Decouple Filter from BitSet
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-584
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Search
> Affects Versions: 2.0.1
> Reporter: Peter Schäfer
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: BitsMatcher.java, Filter-20060628.patch,
> HitCollector-20060628.patch, IndexSearcher-20060628.patch,
> MatchCollector.java, Matcher.java, Matcher20070226.patch,
> Scorer-20060628.patch, Searchable-20060628.patch, Searcher-20060628.patch,
> Some Matchers.zip, SortedVIntList.java, TestSortedVIntList.java
>
>
> {code}
> package org.apache.lucene.search;
> public abstract class Filter implements java.io.Serializable
> {
> public abstract AbstractBitSet bits(IndexReader reader) throws IOException;
> }
> public interface AbstractBitSet
> {
> public boolean get(int index);
> }
> {code}
> It would be useful if the method =Filter.bits()= returned an abstract
> interface, instead of =java.util.BitSet=.
> Use case: there is a very large index, and, depending on the user's
> privileges, only a small portion of the index is actually visible.
> Sparsely populated =java.util.BitSet=s are not efficient and waste lots of
> memory. It would be desirable to have an alternative BitSet implementation
> with smaller memory footprint.
> Though it _is_ possibly to derive classes from =java.util.BitSet=, it was
> obviously not designed for that purpose.
> That's why I propose to use an interface instead. The default implementation
> could still delegate to =java.util.BitSet=.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
