[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Paul Elschot updated LUCENE-584:
--------------------------------
Attachment: ContribQueries20080111.patch
I tried to move contrib from Filter.bits() to BitSetFilter.bits().
The ContribQueries20080111.patch does that with contrib/queries,
and with that applied the xml-query-parser tests still pass.
I don't expect changes will be needed to xml-query-parser because it
does not use Filter.bits().
At the moment I don't know why I had problems with it half a year ago.
For contrib/miscellaneous the changes needed to ChainedFilter are more involved:
To make the tests pass, I had to make RangeFilter and QueryFilter subclasses of
BitSetFilter, and to remove the final keyword from BitSetFilter.getDocIdSet().
The alternative would be to add BitSet versions of RangeFilter and QueryFilter
to ChainedFilterTest.
So it can be made to work, but ChainedFilter and/or ChainedFilterTest will need
to be changed.
Stepping back a bit, I think ChainedFilter might better move to
OpenBitSetFilter.
No patch for contrib/miscelleneous, it's too ugly at the moment here.
The conclusion is that I see no real problems with the take4 patch to move
contrib
from Filter.bits to BitSetFilter.bits.
> 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
> Assignee: Michael Busch
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 2.4
>
> Attachments: bench-diff.txt, bench-diff.txt,
> ContribQueries20080111.patch, lucene-584-take2.patch,
> lucene-584-take3-part1.patch, lucene-584-take3-part2.patch,
> lucene-584-take4-part1.patch, lucene-584-take4-part2.patch, lucene-584.patch,
> Matcher-20070905-2default.patch, Matcher-20070905-3core.patch,
> Matcher-20071122-1ground.patch, Some Matchers.zip
>
>
> {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]
