[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7880?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16055402#comment-16055402
 ] 

Adrien Grand commented on LUCENE-7880:
--------------------------------------

Agreed with you David that it is similar to the maximum number of determinized 
states on {{AutomatonQuery}}. The difference to me is that {{AutomatonQuery}} 
is an expert API while {{BooleanQuery}} is one of the main classes of our API 
and I'd like to keep it lean. I think it is a good example actually: imagine 
that we want to remove this setter in order to simplify the API, it is going to 
be a backward break not only on {{AutomatonQuery}} but also on other classes 
that propagate this option like query parsers. These features are much harder 
to remove than to add. The addition of a single method feels harmless, but 
eventually they add up and make Lucene harder to understand and use than it 
should be.

bq. It's easy to get cooperation or an attitude of consensus building in that 
case

You're telling me about cooperation and consensus while all you have done on 
that issue so far is describing my arguments as religious views and implying 
that I'm reasoning like a drunk paranoid. You're just trying to shut me down, 
not to convince me in order to reach consensus.

> Make boolean query clause limit configurable per-query
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-7880
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7880
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Yonik Seeley
>
> As we know, the magic BooleanQuery.maxClauseCount has bitten many people over 
> time.
> It's also a static, which really hurts multi-tenancy (i.e. we can't have 
> different settings for different users, clients, or use-cases).
> If we want to keep this static as a default, then at least we should allow it 
> to be overridden on a per-query basis when we know it is the desired behavior 
> and not a bug.
> Perhaps the simplest way to achieve this would be a setter on 
> BooleanQuery.Builder that configures the limit for that instance only?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to