[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5914?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14234059#comment-14234059
 ] 

Adrien Grand commented on LUCENE-5914:
--------------------------------------

+1 thanks Robert. I am good with a constructor argument, the only reason why I 
initially added it as a protected method was to be consistent with postings and 
doc values formats.

Regarding the patch, it just feels weird to me to have this 
{{Objects.requireNonNull(mode)}} validation in the {{Lucene50Codec(Mode)}} 
constructor, I would have expeced it to be solely the responsibility of the 
Lucene50StoredFieldsFormat constructor?

> More options for stored fields compression
> ------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-5914
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5914
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Adrien Grand
>            Assignee: Adrien Grand
>             Fix For: 5.0
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-5914.patch, LUCENE-5914.patch, LUCENE-5914.patch, 
> LUCENE-5914.patch, LUCENE-5914.patch, LUCENE-5914.patch, LUCENE-5914.patch
>
>
> Since we added codec-level compression in Lucene 4.1 I think I got about the 
> same amount of users complaining that compression was too aggressive and that 
> compression was too light.
> I think it is due to the fact that we have users that are doing very 
> different things with Lucene. For example if you have a small index that fits 
> in the filesystem cache (or is close to), then you might never pay for actual 
> disk seeks and in such a case the fact that the current stored fields format 
> needs to over-decompress data can sensibly slow search down on cheap queries.
> On the other hand, it is more and more common to use Lucene for things like 
> log analytics, and in that case you have huge amounts of data for which you 
> don't care much about stored fields performance. However it is very 
> frustrating to notice that the data that you store takes several times less 
> space when you gzip it compared to your index although Lucene claims to 
> compress stored fields.
> For that reason, I think it would be nice to have some kind of options that 
> would allow to trade speed for compression in the default codec.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to