[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1252?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12701957#action_12701957
 ] 

Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-1252:
--------------------------------------

There is no patch for now.

HitCollectors should not be affected by this, as they would only be involved 
when a real match is found, and that, when position info is needed, necessarily 
involves the positions.

Extending this with a cheap score brings another issue: should a cheap score be 
given for a document that might match, but in the end does not really match 
when positions are used? At the moment, I don't think so: score values are 
normally cheap to compute, but accessing positions is not cheap.





> Avoid using positions when not all required terms are present
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1252
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1252
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Wish
>          Components: Search
>            Reporter: Paul Elschot
>            Priority: Minor
>
> In the Scorers of queries with (lots of) Phrases and/or (nested) Spans, 
> currently next() and skipTo() will use position information even when other 
> parts of the query cannot match because some required terms are not present.
> This could be avoided by adding some methods to Scorer that relax the 
> postcondition of next() and skipTo() to something like "all required terms 
> are present, but no position info was checked yet", and implementing these 
> methods for Scorers that do conjunctions: BooleanScorer, PhraseScorer, and 
> SpanScorer/NearSpans.

-- 
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

Reply via email to