Hi Michael, We are still working on the port of 4.8.0, and TermInSetQuery doesn’t exist in this version. I took a quick look, and it looks like there are some missing Automaton dependencies that would need to be ported to support it, and I am not sure how deep that rabbit hole goes. But I think it is safe to say that the OP hasn't attempted this due to how complex of a task it would be.
Unfortunately, this isn’t my issue. I am reporting 2nd hand, so would appreciate if you would reply to the OP directly if you have any similar questions. https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/issues/413 But I think you have answered my question. It wouldn't be sensible to have 2 similar query implementations marked public in Lucene, especially when TermInSetQuery is a newer implementation. Thanks, Shad Storhaug (NightOwl888) Project Chairperson – Apache Lucene.NET -----Original Message----- From: Michael Sokolov <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, November 1, 2021 9:02 AM To: Lucene Dev <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Making org.apache.lucene.search.join.TermsQuery Public I'm not really sure why we have these two different implementations, but TermInSetQuery (which is public, and in core) provides a similar function -- have you compared the performance of the two? On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 6:57 PM Shad Storhaug <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > In Lucene.NET we had a request from an end user to make > org.apache.lucene.search.join.TermsQuery (and its constructor) public because > it seems to outperform BooleanQuery. > > > > https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/issues/413 > > > > This request seems reasonable, but I just wanted to check why the class was > made package private in Lucene? Would this be something you would consider > making public? > > > > Thanks, > > Shad Storhaug (NightOwl888) > > Project Chairperson – Apache Lucene.NET > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
