[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1476?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12662101#action_12662101 ]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1476: -------------------------------------------- {quote} > If we move the deletions filtering up, then we'd increase traffic through > that cache {quote} OK, right. So we may have some added cost because of this. I think it's only TermScorer that uses the bulk API though. {quote} > If you were applying deletions filtering after Scorer.next(), then it seems > likely that costs would go up because of extra hit processing. However, if > you use Scorer.skipTo() to jump past deletions, as in the loop I provided > above, then PhraseScorer etc. shouldn't incur any more costs themselves. {quote} Ahhh, now I got it! Good, you're right. {quote} > Under the skipTo() loop, I think the filter effectively does get applied > earlier in the chain. Does that make sense? {quote} Right. This is how Lucene works today. Excellent. So, net/net it seems like "deletes-as-a-filter" approach is compelling? > BitVector implement DocIdSet > ---------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-1476 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1476 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Index > Affects Versions: 2.4 > Reporter: Jason Rutherglen > Priority: Trivial > Attachments: LUCENE-1476.patch > > Original Estimate: 12h > Remaining Estimate: 12h > > BitVector can implement DocIdSet. This is for making > SegmentReader.deletedDocs pluggable. -- 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: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org