On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:37, Ard Schrijvers <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
+1 And as Felix noted, this is "just" an internal improvement to the Lucene search index and can be done quite early in 2.x. The only question is the migration of indexes. This could be done by still supporting old-style indexes (for 2.x releases), but when a new index is created, the newer variant is chosen. Existing repositories that upgrade could then chose, ie. delete and re-index to get the new structure. If this makes the implementation too difficult, we could simply offer a different SearchIndex implementation, so one can chose via the configuration. Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek [email protected]
