[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-05-05 Thread ASF subversion and git services (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13989429#comment-13989429 ] ASF subversion and git services commented on LUCENE-5609: - Commit

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-05-05 Thread ASF subversion and git services (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13989496#comment-13989496 ] ASF subversion and git services commented on LUCENE-5609: - Commit

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-05-04 Thread Michael McCandless (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13989009#comment-13989009 ] Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-5609: I plan to commit 8/16 soon ...

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-05-02 Thread Michael McCandless (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13988063#comment-13988063 ] Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-5609: I think we should do something

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-23 Thread David Smiley (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13978392#comment-13978392 ] David Smiley commented on LUCENE-5609: -- bq. I think testing on randomly distributed

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-22 Thread Michael McCandless (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13976902#comment-13976902 ] Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-5609: I think 8/16 (4 terms for

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-20 Thread Paul Elschot (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13975111#comment-13975111 ] Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-5609: -- Going from 4 to 16 for the 64 bit types is a

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-20 Thread Robert Muir (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13975116#comment-13975116 ] Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-5609: - Its not a large step, its that 4 was

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-20 Thread Paul Elschot (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13975156#comment-13975156 ] Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-5609: -- Have a look at LUCENE-1470, even 2 was

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-20 Thread Robert Muir (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13975170#comment-13975170 ] Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-5609: - The old discussions and benchmarks are

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-20 Thread Uwe Schindler (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13975183#comment-13975183 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-5609: --- bq. Have a look at LUCENE-1470, even 2 was

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-20 Thread Robert Muir (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13975204#comment-13975204 ] Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-5609: - {quote} I think the main problem of this issue

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-19 Thread Paul Elschot (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13974818#comment-13974818 ] Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-5609: -- Backward compat is indeed a strong point.

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-19 Thread Uwe Schindler (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13974862#comment-13974862 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-5609: --- I would use precStep 8 for ints (Solr does

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-19 Thread Uwe Schindler (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13974866#comment-13974866 ] Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-5609: --- To just explain, why you might have

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-19 Thread Robert Muir (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13974870#comment-13974870 ] Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-5609: - I see your point Uwe, however we should

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-19 Thread Michael McCandless (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13974899#comment-13974899 ] Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-5609: +1 for 8/16. Should we revisit

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-18 Thread Robert Muir (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13974356#comment-13974356 ] Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-5609: - To be simple, i think a change we make has to

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-17 Thread Michael McCandless (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13973001#comment-13973001 ] Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-5609: Another test, this time on a

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-17 Thread Robert Muir (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13973381#comment-13973381 ] Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-5609: - +1, I think the 4.0 MTQ rework made a lot of

[jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-5609) Should we revisit the default numeric precision step?

2014-04-17 Thread Paul Elschot (JIRA)
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5609?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13973393#comment-13973393 ] Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-5609: -- When the current implementation can only