It does not specifically incorporate caching to disk, but what it does do is easily allow you to provide a new Cache implementation. The default implementation is just a simple in memory Map, but its trivial to provide a new implementation using something like EHCache to back the Cache implementation.
I don't know if caching to disk will really be that much of a benefit, so if you play around I would love to hear your results. The big benefit is if you are reopening Readers with field caches, it can be waaay faster. - Mark On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 05:14 -0700, Britske wrote: > I've seen some recent activity on LUCENE-831 "Complete overhaul of FieldCache > API" and read that it must be able to cleanly patch to trunk (haven't tried > yet). > > What I'd like to know from people involved is if this patch incorporates > offloading of fieldcache to disk, or if this hasn't yet been taken into > account. As far as I can follow it, this was one of the initial intentions. > > Thanks, > Britske --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
