[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12720187#action_12720187
 ] 

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1673:
--------------------------------------------

bq. With a NumericTermQuery you would only hit the document exactly on the same 
millisecond.

Couldn't I quantize my times (say, by day), then index using
NumericField, then use NumericRangeQuery for certain cases and
NumericTermQuery if I want to precisely match one day?

Or for non-Date fields it might be apply too... maybe I'm searching
for a hard drive, so I drill down by range (size >= 1.0 TB) and then
when there's only a few sizes in the set we offer up the exact choices
(1.0, 1.5, 2.0 TB) and when user clicks on one of those we use a
NumericTermQuery.

bq. Because of this different use cases, in my opinion, DateTools has its usage.

OK I agree, we should leave DateTools un-deprecated.  If/when we offer
easier integration for Dates w/ Numeric*, we can reconsider
deprecation at that point.


> Move TrieRange to core
> ----------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1673
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1673
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Search
>    Affects Versions: 2.9
>            Reporter: Uwe Schindler
>            Assignee: Uwe Schindler
>             Fix For: 2.9
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-1673.patch, LUCENE-1673.patch, LUCENE-1673.patch
>
>
> TrieRange was iterated many times and seems stable now (LUCENE-1470, 
> LUCENE-1582, LUCENE-1602). There is lots of user interest, Solr added it to 
> its default FieldTypes (SOLR-940) and if possible I want to move it to core 
> before release of 2.9.
> Before this can be done, there are some things to think about:
> # There are now classes called LongTrieRangeQuery, IntTrieRangeQuery, how 
> should they be called in core? I would suggest to leave it as it is. On the 
> other hand, if this keeps our only numeric query implementation, we could 
> call it LongRangeQuery, IntRangeQuery or NumericRangeQuery (see below, here 
> are problems). Same for the TokenStreams and Filters.
> # Maybe the pairs of classes for indexing and searching should be moved into 
> one class: NumericTokenStream, NumericRangeQuery, NumericRangeFilter. The 
> problem here: ctors must be able to pass int, long, double, float as range 
> parameters. For the end user, mixing these 4 types in one class is hard to 
> handle. If somebody forgets to add a L to a long, it suddenly instantiates a 
> int version of range query, hitting no results and so on. Same with other 
> types. Maybe accept java.lang.Number as parameter (because nullable for 
> half-open bounds) and one enum for the type.
> # TrieUtils move into o.a.l.util? or document or?
> # Move TokenStreams into o.a.l.analysis, ShiftAttribute into 
> o.a.l.analysis.tokenattributes? Somewhere else?
> # If we rename the classes, should Solr stay with Trie (because there are 
> different impls)?
> # Maybe add a subclass of AbstractField, that automatically creates these 
> TokenStreams and omits norms/tf per default for easier addition to Document 
> instances?

-- 
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