On Wed, 2008-05-07 at 12:37 +0200, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: > > > The current spec requires that the server keep a list of all > uris > mapped to hit ids somehow. Of you know the index will not > change you > can rerun the query. > > There is no need to fetch a single uri via GetHits. The > HitsAdded > signal tells you how many hits there. You do not have to use > GetHits > at all. If you use GetHitData exclusively for getting the > data, you > basically are paging. > > So the current spec is fine for sequential access _and_ > paging. > > I would think so too - no matter what the conclusion on the > misunderstanding above is. > > I am still very open for discussions, but I have yet to see a > (realistic) use case where the current spec would fail. I think we > need a good use case and detailed spec of the suggested new API (what > it does in error conditions, is it correlated with GetHits sequential > access, does it use hit.fields or take requested fields as params - > like GetHitdata, etc).
Well pls give example where I get all hit URI for results 100-110 for a search IDs are not sequential so how do I do it? jamie _______________________________________________ Xesam mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xesam
