>> Custom analyzers. > No problem. How are they recorded in the index?
>> Several indexes using the same analyzer. > No problem. Only necessary if the analyzer is costly or has some esoteric > need for shared state. And possible via subclassing Schema or Analyzer. It is. >> Intentionally different analyzers for indexing and searching. > No problem. That only makes sense in the context of QueryParser, and the KS > QueryParser allows you to supply an analyzer which overrides the Schema. But well, it differs from analyzer used for indexation in one or two options, and shares a heap of others. >> Using this analyzer without any index at all - like I do highlight on >> a separate machine to minimize GC pauses, or tag docs by running a >> heap of queries against MemoryIndex. > No problem. Distribute a Schema subclass among several machines. You mean read an index on one machine, create Analyzer, serialize it and send over the wire to other machines? I hope that's either a joke or I misunderstood you. I'm not opposed to the idea itself. It's just that it should be a layer over existing functionality and in no way something mandatory. Storing a list of stopwords in the index sounds fun. Storing a fat synonym/morphology dictionary while completely analogous, is no longer fun. -- Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (ear...@gmail.com) Home / Mobile: +7 (495) 683-567-4 / +7 (903) 5-888-423 ICQ: 104465785 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
