Hi, On 18.02.2010 10:37, Ard Schrijvers wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:35 AM, Ard Schrijvers > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 5:15 PM, Thomas Müller <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>>> each property indexed in its own Lucene field >>> >>> Could you explain in more details? What is a 1:1 mapping? Do you mean >>> each property type should have it's own index, or each property name >>> should have its own index? Would this not increase the number of >>> Lucene index files a lot? >> >> No, I mean that the current implementation is based on a Lucene >> version that could not handle infinit number of unique lucene fields >> (jcr can have any property name). Therefor, Jackrabbit indexes every >> different jcr fieldname in the same lucene field, but prefix the value >> with the jackrabbit fieldname. This has quite some disadvantages, >> memory loss (terms are cached in lucene and in jackrabbit without the >> fieldname prefix), and I think we cannot easily make use of the Lucene >> trie range stuff making range queries on dates, doubles and longs >> efficient > > Addon: So my improvement would be to suggest to index every unique jcr > fieldname in a unique lucene field, and do not prefix values as > currently is being done. This makes lots of the lucene classes and > queries in jr easier or redundant
Being by no means an expert in this field.... but this sounds very much doable in the shorter time frame of 2.x release, right ? Regards Felix > > Ard > >> >> Regards Ard >> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Thomas >>> >> >
