[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1084?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12566728#action_12566728
]
Steven Rowe commented on LUCENE-1084:
-------------------------------------
Mike, I see you added a test for the user-specified max field length - cool.
It made me think of the IndexHTML.java usage, which should probably be changed
to conform to the new style:
{code}
writer = new IndexWriter(index, new StandardAnalyzer(), create,
IndexWriter.MaxFieldLength.LIMITED);
writer.setMaxFieldLength(1000000);
{code}
should be:
{code}
writer = new IndexWriter(index, new StandardAnalyzer(), create,
new IndexWriter.MaxFieldLength(1000000));
{code}
Hmm, now that I look, I can see several other new IndexWriter() /
setMaxFieldLength() sequences that should be changed ... I'll submit a patch
shortly.
> increase default maxFieldLength?
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1084
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1084
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Affects Versions: 2.2
> Reporter: Daniel Naber
> Assignee: Steven Rowe
> Fix For: 2.4
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-1084.part2.patch, LUCENE-1084.part2.take2.patch,
> LUCENE-1084.patch
>
>
> To my understanding, Lucene 2.3 will easily index large documents. So
> shouldn't we get rid of the 10,000 default limit for the field length? 10,000
> isn't that much and as Lucene doesn't have any error logging by default, this
> is a common problem for users that is difficult to debug if you don't know
> where to look.
> A better new default might be Integer.MAX_VALUE.
--
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]
