[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1458?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12785058#action_12785058
 ] 

Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1458:
---------------------------------------

Mike: When fixing the NRQ test Mark merged, I found a problem/inconsistency 
with FilteredTermsEnum:

Normal usage of a termsEnum is that it is positioned on the first term (e.g. 
after calling getTermsEnum()). Normally you have a do-while-loop and call 
next() at the end, which is fine. Most code using TermsEnums first checks 
inside the do-while "if (term()==null)" and then break (incorrect positioned or 
exhausted termsenum). As the call to term() does not check the returned term, 
it may contain an term, that should normally be filtered. The same happens if 
you call term() after it is exhausted. The FilteredTermsEnum should return null 
for term() and docFreq() if the enum is empty or exhausted. I have seen that 
you added empty() to it, but for consistency the FilteredTermsEnum should 
return null/-1.

I fixed the test to check for empty() (sorry for two commits, the assertNull 
check was wrong, I changed before committing).

Opinions?

> Further steps towards flexible indexing
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1458
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1458
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Index
>    Affects Versions: 2.9
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>            Assignee: Michael McCandless
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: LUCENE-1458-back-compat.patch, 
> LUCENE-1458-back-compat.patch, LUCENE-1458-back-compat.patch, 
> LUCENE-1458-back-compat.patch, LUCENE-1458-back-compat.patch, 
> LUCENE-1458-back-compat.patch, LUCENE-1458-MTQ-BW.patch, 
> LUCENE-1458-NRQ.patch, LUCENE-1458.patch, LUCENE-1458.patch, 
> LUCENE-1458.patch, LUCENE-1458.patch, LUCENE-1458.patch, LUCENE-1458.patch, 
> LUCENE-1458.patch, LUCENE-1458.patch, LUCENE-1458.patch, LUCENE-1458.patch, 
> LUCENE-1458.patch, LUCENE-1458.patch, LUCENE-1458.patch, LUCENE-1458.tar.bz2, 
> LUCENE-1458.tar.bz2, LUCENE-1458.tar.bz2, LUCENE-1458.tar.bz2, 
> LUCENE-1458.tar.bz2, LUCENE-1458.tar.bz2, LUCENE-1458.tar.bz2, 
> LUCENE-1458_rotate.patch, LUCENE-1458_sortorder_bwcompat.patch, 
> LUCENE-1458_termenum_bwcompat.patch, UnicodeTestCase.patch, 
> UnicodeTestCase.patch
>
>
> I attached a very rough checkpoint of my current patch, to get early
> feedback.  All tests pass, though back compat tests don't pass due to
> changes to package-private APIs plus certain bugs in tests that
> happened to work (eg call TermPostions.nextPosition() too many times,
> which the new API asserts against).
> [Aside: I think, when we commit changes to package-private APIs such
> that back-compat tests don't pass, we could go back, make a branch on
> the back-compat tag, commit changes to the tests to use the new
> package private APIs on that branch, then fix nightly build to use the
> tip of that branch?o]
> There's still plenty to do before this is committable! This is a
> rather large change:
>   * Switches to a new more efficient terms dict format.  This still
>     uses tii/tis files, but the tii only stores term & long offset
>     (not a TermInfo).  At seek points, tis encodes term & freq/prox
>     offsets absolutely instead of with deltas delta.  Also, tis/tii
>     are structured by field, so we don't have to record field number
>     in every term.
> .
>     On first 1 M docs of Wikipedia, tii file is 36% smaller (0.99 MB
>     -> 0.64 MB) and tis file is 9% smaller (75.5 MB -> 68.5 MB).
> .
>     RAM usage when loading terms dict index is significantly less
>     since we only load an array of offsets and an array of String (no
>     more TermInfo array).  It should be faster to init too.
> .
>     This part is basically done.
>   * Introduces modular reader codec that strongly decouples terms dict
>     from docs/positions readers.  EG there is no more TermInfo used
>     when reading the new format.
> .
>     There's nice symmetry now between reading & writing in the codec
>     chain -- the current docs/prox format is captured in:
> {code}
> FormatPostingsTermsDictWriter/Reader
> FormatPostingsDocsWriter/Reader (.frq file) and
> FormatPostingsPositionsWriter/Reader (.prx file).
> {code}
>     This part is basically done.
>   * Introduces a new "flex" API for iterating through the fields,
>     terms, docs and positions:
> {code}
> FieldProducer -> TermsEnum -> DocsEnum -> PostingsEnum
> {code}
>     This replaces TermEnum/Docs/Positions.  SegmentReader emulates the
>     old API on top of the new API to keep back-compat.
>     
> Next steps:
>   * Plug in new codecs (pulsing, pfor) to exercise the modularity /
>     fix any hidden assumptions.
>   * Expose new API out of IndexReader, deprecate old API but emulate
>     old API on top of new one, switch all core/contrib users to the
>     new API.
>   * Maybe switch to AttributeSources as the base class for TermsEnum,
>     DocsEnum, PostingsEnum -- this would give readers API flexibility
>     (not just index-file-format flexibility).  EG if someone wanted
>     to store payload at the term-doc level instead of
>     term-doc-position level, you could just add a new attribute.
>   * Test performance & iterate.

-- 
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