I think the Filter's docIdSetIterator is using the top level reader for each segment, because the cardinality of the DocIdSet from which it's created is the same for all readers (and what I expect to see at the top level.
Peter On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Michael McCandless < luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > That doesn't sound good. > > Though, in searchWithFilter, we seem to ask for the Query's scorer, > and the Filter's docIdSetIterator, using the same reader (which may be > toplevel, for the legacy case, or per-segment, for the normal case). > So I'm not [yet] seeing where the issue is... > > Can you boil it down to a smallish test case? > > Mike > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Peter Keegan <peterlkee...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I'm having a problem with 'searchWithFilter' on Lucene 2.9.1. The Filter > > wraps a simple BitSet. When doing a 'MatchAllDocs' query with this > filter, I > > get only a subset of the expected results, even accounting for deletes. > The > > index has 10 segments. In IndexSearcher->searchWithFilter, it looks like > the > > scorer is advancing to the filter's docId, which is the index-wide value, > > but the scorer is using the segment-relative value. If I optimize the > index, > > I get the expected results. > > Does this look like a bug? > > > > Peter > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
