[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1593?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12699344#action_12699344
]
Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-1593:
------------------------------------
bq. I believe if a user upgrades to release XX.9 and removes all code that is
using deprecated methods/classes, it needs to be a jar drop in for 3.0.
This might work, but 3.0 is also about moving to Java 5 with all the
implications. If my app is already on Java 5, then a jar drop is all that'll be
required. But if not, I need to update my app anyway. In addition, there are
some changes in runtime behavior that are going to be made in 3.0. My point is
- I don't know who will actually upgrade to 3.0 by just dropping a jar.
But anyway, I'm not going to argue with policies - you seem to know better than
me about Lucene's back-compat requirements. So the question is whether we want
to deprecate these methods and add the new ones, and if so, can we agree on the
new names (add, updateTop)?
> Optimizations to TopScoreDocCollector and TopFieldCollector
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1593
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1593
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Search
> Reporter: Shai Erera
> Fix For: 2.9
>
>
> This is a spin-off of LUCENE-1575 and proposes to optimize TSDC and TFC code
> to remove unnecessary checks. The plan is:
> # Ensure that IndexSearcher returns segements in increasing doc Id order,
> instead of numDocs().
> # Change TSDC and TFC's code to not use the doc id as a tie breaker. New docs
> will always have larger ids and therefore cannot compete.
> # Pre-populate HitQueue with sentinel values in TSDC (score = Float.NEG_INF)
> and remove the check if reusableSD == null.
> # Also move to use "changing top" and then call adjustTop(), in case we
> update the queue.
> # some methods in Sort explicitly add SortField.FIELD_DOC as a "tie breaker"
> for the last SortField. But, doing so should not be necessary (since we
> already break ties by docID), and is in fact less efficient (once the above
> optimization is in).
> # Investigate PQ - can we deprecate insert() and have only
> insertWithOverflow()? Add a addDummyObjects method which will populate the
> queue without "arranging" it, just store the objects in the array (this can
> be used to pre-populate sentinel values)?
> I will post a patch as well as some perf measurements as soon as I have them.
--
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]
