[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7407?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15501202#comment-15501202
 ] 

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-7407:
--------------------------------------------

bq. It's nice to see we don't have to worry anymore about the '0' value being 
possibly non-existent.

Right!

bq. It appears advance(docId) is inherited from DISI and thus it must be called 
with sequential docIDs. Did you run into any spot in the codebase that didn't 
advance sequentially and so you had to do something different?

I was surprised how few places didn't go in order ...

E.g., index sorting was tricky, since it very much relied on random access.

A number of tests also accessed docIDs that came back in hits which of course 
may not be "in order".

> Explore switching doc values to an iterator API
> -----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-7407
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7407
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>            Assignee: Michael McCandless
>              Labels: docValues
>         Attachments: LUCENE-7407.patch
>
>
> I think it could be compelling if we restricted doc values to use an
> iterator API at read time, instead of the more general random access
> API we have today:
>   * It would make doc values disk usage more of a "you pay for what
>     what you actually use", like postings, which is a compelling
>     reduction for sparse usage.
>   * I think codecs could compress better and maybe speed up decoding
>     of doc values, even in the non-sparse case, since the read-time
>     API is more restrictive "forward only" instead of random access.
>   * We could remove {{getDocsWithField}} entirely, since that's
>     implicit in the iteration, and the awkward "return 0 if the
>     document didn't have this field" would go away.
>   * We can remove the annoying thread locals we must make today in
>     {{CodecReader}}, and close the trappy "I accidentally shared a
>     single XXXDocValues instance across threads", since an iterator is
>     inherently "use once".
>   * We could maybe leverage the numerous optimizations we've done for
>     postings over time, since the two problems ("iterate over doc ids
>     and store something interesting for each") are very similar.
> This idea has come up many in the past, e.g. LUCENE-7253 is a recent
> example, and very early iterations of doc values started with exactly
> this ;)
> However, it's a truly enormous change, likely 7.0 only.  Or maybe we
> could have the new iterator APIs also ported to 6.x side by side with
> the deprecate existing random-access APIs.



--
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