> On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > > This is only a minimal optimization, suitable for very large indexes. > The > > problem is: if you have many terms in highest precission (a lot of > different > > double values), seeking is more costly if you jump from higher to lower > > precisions. > > That's my point... in very large indexes this should not result in any > difference at all on average because the terms would be no where near > each other.
OK. -- I prepare a new TrieRangeFilter implementation, just taking the String[] fieldnames and the sortableLong and the precisionStep. And I think, you are right. One could completely remove the "storeing" API. If one wants to add stored fields, he could use NumberUtils. > As an example: in a very big index, one wants to independently collect > all documents that match "apple" and all documents that match "zebra", > which term you seek to first should not matter. OK, I agree :) Uwe --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
