[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6539?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14580547#comment-14580547
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-6539:
--------------------------------------------
OK how about for this issue, I move DocValuesTermsQuery, DocValuesRangeQuery
and this new one (DocValuesNumbersQuery) to sandbox, add warnings /
experimental, and commit there?
I think it would be wonderful if TermsQuery did all this magically, but I don't
think it should hold up adding this query.
> Add DocValuesNumbersQuery, like DocValuesTermsQuery but works only with long
> values
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-6539
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-6539
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Fix For: 5.3, Trunk
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-6539.patch
>
>
> This query accepts any document where any of the provided set of longs
> was indexed into the specified field as a numeric DV field
> (NumericDocValuesField or SortedNumericDocValuesField). You can use
> it instead of DocValuesTermsQuery when you have field values that can
> be represented as longs.
> Like DocValuesTermsQuery, this is slowish in general, since it doesn't
> use an inverted data structure, but in certain cases (many
> terms/numbers and fewish matching hits) it should be faster than using
> TermsQuery because it's done as a "post filter" when other (faster)
> query clauses are MUST'd with it.
> In such cases it should also be faster than DocValuesTermsQuery since
> it skips having to resolve terms -> ords.
--
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
