[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3312?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13446923#comment-13446923
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-3312:
---------------------------------------
Hi Nikola,
I am about to reintegrate the branch back o Lucene trunk. We need a new entry
for MIGRATE.txt. Can you prepare one, so users of the current Lucene 4.0 API
can migrate to the new one? It should give some hints what needs to be changed
in the code to make a Lucene 4.0 APP ready for Lucene trunk (5.0)? The
migrate.txt is formatted using Markdown syntax, so mostly text-only.
I will in all cases commit the reintragrated branch, but I want to add a short
guide about the changes at a later stage.
> Break out StorableField from IndexableField
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-3312
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3312
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core/index
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Assignee: Nikola Tankovic
> Labels: gsoc2012, lucene-gsoc-12
> Fix For: Field Type branch
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-3312-DocumentIterators-uwe.patch,
> lucene-3312-patch-01.patch, lucene-3312-patch-02.patch,
> lucene-3312-patch-03.patch, lucene-3312-patch-04.patch,
> lucene-3312-patch-05.patch, lucene-3312-patch-06.patch,
> lucene-3312-patch-07.patch, lucene-3312-patch-08.patch,
> lucene-3312-patch-09.patch, lucene-3312-patch-10.patch,
> lucene-3312-patch-11.patch, lucene-3312-patch-12a.patch,
> lucene-3312-patch-12.patch, lucene-3312-patch-13.patch,
> lucene-3312-patch-14.patch, LUCENE-3312-reintegration.patch
>
>
> In the field type branch we have strongly decoupled
> Document/Field/FieldType impl from the indexer, by having only a
> narrow API (IndexableField) passed to IndexWriter. This frees apps up
> use their own "documents" instead of the "user-space" impls we provide
> in oal.document.
> Similarly, with LUCENE-3309, we've done the same thing on the
> doc/field retrieval side (from IndexReader), with the
> StoredFieldsVisitor.
> But, maybe we should break out StorableField from IndexableField,
> such that when you index a doc you provide two Iterables -- one for the
> IndexableFields and one for the StorableFields. Either can be null.
> One downside is possible perf hit for fields that are both indexed &
> stored (ie, we visit them twice, lookup their name in a hash twice,
> etc.). But the upside is a cleaner separation of concerns in API....
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
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
