----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37915/#review97089 -----------------------------------------------------------
It looks like starting with lucene 5.2.0, there *is* a better way to index a binary field by creating a StringField and passing it some bytes. So I will pursue that approach instead. - Dan Smith On Aug. 29, 2015, 12:23 a.m., Dan Smith wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/37915/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Aug. 29, 2015, 12:23 a.m.) > > > Review request for geode, Ashvin A and xiaojian zhou. > > > Repository: geode > > > Description > ------- > > I was trying to convert the key to a binary field, but it turns out > there is no way to index on a binary field. So, in order to support > deletes and updates on the lucene index, if the gemfire key is not a > string, I am Base64 encoding the serialized key. > > > Diffs > ----- > > gemfire-lucene/build.gradle b21339b083e92a272540bc74d88bac4b08564ed3 > > gemfire-lucene/src/main/java/com/gemstone/gemfire/cache/lucene/internal/repository/serializer/SerializerUtil.java > 07e89c96801cbc8445df6a0653dfea36ae8445fc > > gemfire-lucene/src/test/java/com/gemstone/gemfire/cache/lucene/internal/repository/SingleIndexRepositoryImplJUnitTest.java > bfae55a2efa42e4436f815d98cee17f56d50d403 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/37915/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Dan Smith > >
