[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3001?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13012705#comment-13012705
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-3001:
---------------------------------------
bq. I don't see why Solr needs to match Lucene everywhere. I tested myself, and
the size deltas with smaller precision steps were pretty large. I think Solr's
defaults should stay as they are and only lowered when one desires a different
tradeoff (faster range queries for larger index size).
Those comments are contraproductive for this issue. So the correct way to solve
this would be: Won't fix. For me as a pure-Lucene user this is of course the
only correct fix to solve this :-)
> Add TrieFieldHelper lucene so we can write solr compatible Trie* fields w/o
> solr dependency
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-3001
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3001
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Ryan McKinley
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: LUCENE-3001-TrieFieldHelper.patch
>
>
> The solr support for numeric fields writes the stored value as binary vs the
> lucene NumericField
> We should move this logic to a helper class in lucene core so that libraries
> that do not depend on solr can write TrieFields that solr can read.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
