[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6199?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14342201#comment-14342201
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-6199:
-------------------------------------
btw: I think you still missed my entire point. This is a big scary patch, to
help only an abuse case.
It brings *incredible* risk to all lucene users, just to help a few that licked
lead paint growing up.
So if we can break it down into digestible chunks, then I feel we can make
steps to simplify the logic, carefully review changes, and improve tests to
help reduce that risk. One digestible chunk at a time.
But if the only way this is gonna go in, is a huge scary patch that rips across
the codebase changing codec code, then yeah, we shouldnt do it.
> Reduce per-field heap usage for indexed fields
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-6199
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6199
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Fix For: Trunk, 5.1
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-6199.patch, LUCENE-6199.patch
>
>
> Lucene uses a non-trivial baseline bytes of heap for each indexed
> field, and I know it's abusive for an app to create 100K indexed
> fields but I still think we can and should make some effort to reduce
> heap usage per unique field?
> E.g. in block tree we store 3 BytesRefs per field, when 3 byte[]s
> would do...
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
