[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2649?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12910554#action_12910554
]
Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-2649:
--------------------------------------
bq. Should we make it optional, whether the valid bitset should be computed?
The trick is how to implement that (unless you mean just set it to true/false
for all fields at once). Putting a flag on the FieldCache.getXXX methods is
insufficient.
Only the application knows if some of it's future uses of that field will
require the bitset for matching docs, but it's Lucene that's often making the
calls to the field cache.
Perhaps FieldCache.Parser was originally just too narrow in scope - it should
have been a factory method for handling all decisions about creating and
populating a field cache entry?
> FieldCache should include a BitSet for matching docs
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2649
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2649
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Ryan McKinley
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch,
> LUCENE-2649-FieldCacheWithBitSet.patch
>
>
> The FieldCache returns an array representing the values for each doc.
> However there is no way to know if the doc actually has a value.
> This should be changed to return an object representing the values *and* a
> BitSet for all valid docs.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
