Hey Jason
o.a.l.s.trie looks interesting and has a lot of potential, locallucene
1.5+ release moved to a Cartesian tier system away from
the boundary box filter a while though.
A TierRange or RangeFilter as the one I used in v1.0 was a little
inefficient as you have to do a bit AND on 2 range
ww.pangaea.de/> http://www.pangaea.de/
E-mail: uschind...@pangaea.de
_
From: patrick o'leary [mailto:polear...@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 9:14 PM
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: 2.9, 3.0 and deprecation]
Hey Jason
o.a.l.s.trie looks interes
dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: 2.9, 3.0 and deprecation]
Hey Jason
o.a.l.s.trie looks interesting and has a lot of potential, locallucene 1.5+
release moved to a Cartesian tier system away from
the boundary box filter a while though.
A TierRange or RangeFilter as the one I used
M - University
of Bremen
Room 2500, Leobener Str., D-28359 Bremen
Tel.: +49 421 218 65595
Fax: +49 421 218 65505
http://www.pangaea.de/
E-mail: uschind...@pangaea.de
From:
patrick o'leary [mailto:polear...@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, December
15, 2008
9:14 PM
To: java-d
> I've only read through the jdoc of tier so far, but I'm guessing it's
> doing a dictionary search and splitting the the index readers position
> based on the result being less than or greater than upper / lower values.
> Which may be faster than a TermDocs seek, and certainly
> worth while invest
Yes, typo.. long day yesterday
Uwe Schindler wrote:
I've only read through the jdoc of tier so far, but I'm guessing it's
doing a dictionary search and splitting the the index readers position
based on the result being less than or greater than upper / lower values.
Which may be fast
org
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: 2.9, 3.0 and deprecation]
Yes, typo.. long day yesterday
Uwe Schindler wrote:
I've only read through the jdoc of tier so far, but I'm guessing it's
doing a dictionary search and splitting the the index readers position
based on the result being les
