[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1478?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12668799#action_12668799
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1478:
--------------------------------------------
Yonik, why was the failure so intermittent?
So it sounds like Solr was relying on Lucene loading the entire
float[] for all docs in the MultiSegmentReader, when only some
segments were new? (And so it was LUCENE-1483 that caused the
failure).
Lucene implicitly assumes that a FieldCache's arrays do not change for
a given segment; this is normally safe since the arrays are derived
from the postings in the field (which are write once).
But it sounds like Solr changed that assumption, and the values in the
(Solr-subclass of) FieldCache's arrays are now derived from something
external, which is no longer write once.
How do you plan to fix it with Solr? It seems like, since you are
maintaining a private cache, you could forcefully evict entries from
the cache for all SegmentReaders whenever the external file has
changed (or a new MultiSegmentReader had been opened)?
> Missing possibility to supply custom FieldParser when sorting search results
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1478
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1478
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Search
> Affects Versions: 2.4
> Reporter: Uwe Schindler
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Fix For: 2.9
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-1478-cleanup.patch,
> LUCENE-1478-no-superinterface.patch, LUCENE-1478.patch, LUCENE-1478.patch,
> LUCENE-1478.patch, LUCENE-1478.patch, LUCENE-1478.patch
>
>
> When implementing the new TrieRangeQuery for contrib (LUCENE-1470), I was
> confronted by the problem that the special trie-encoded values (which are
> longs in a special encoding) cannot be sorted by Searcher.search() and
> SortField. The problem is: If you use SortField.LONG, you get
> NumberFormatExceptions. The trie encoded values may be sorted using
> SortField.String (as the encoding is in such a way, that they are sortable as
> Strings), but this is very memory ineffective.
> ExtendedFieldCache gives the possibility to specify a custom LongParser when
> retrieving the cached values. But you cannot use this during searching,
> because there is no possibility to supply this custom LongParser to the
> SortField.
> I propose a change in the sort classes:
> Include a pointer to the parser instance to be used in SortField (if not
> given use the default). My idea is to create a SortField using a new
> constructor
> {code}SortField(String field, int type, Object parser, boolean reverse){code}
> The parser is "object" because all current parsers have no super-interface.
> The ideal solution would be to have:
> {code}SortField(String field, int type, FieldCache.Parser parser, boolean
> reverse){code}
> and FieldCache.Parser is a super-interface (just empty, more like a
> marker-interface) of all other parsers (like LongParser...). The sort
> implementation then must be changed to respect the given parser (if not
> NULL), else use the default FieldCache.getXXXX without parser.
--
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
