[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4198?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16309842#comment-16309842
]
Adrien Grand commented on LUCENE-4198:
--------------------------------------
Some things I forgot to mention:
- this doesn't optimize the omitFreqs case, but we should be able to do that
just like the patch already optimizes omitNorms
- in the future we could leverage this to speed up phrase queries as well
> Allow codecs to index term impacts
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4198
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4198
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: core/index
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-4198.patch, LUCENE-4198_flush.patch
>
>
> Subtask of LUCENE-4100.
> Thats an example of something similar to impact indexing (though, his
> implementation currently stores a max for the entire term, the problem is the
> same).
> We can imagine other similar algorithms too: I think the codec API should be
> able to support these.
> Currently it really doesnt: Stefan worked around the problem by providing a
> tool to 'rewrite' your index, he passes the IndexReader and Similarity to it.
> But it would be better if we fixed the codec API.
> One problem is that the Postings writer needs to have access to the
> Similarity. Another problem is that it needs access to the term and
> collection statistics up front, rather than after the fact.
> This might have some cost (hopefully minimal), so I'm thinking to experiment
> in a branch with these changes and see if we can make it work well.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
