[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4620?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13550852#comment-13550852
 ] 

Shai Erera commented on LUCENE-4620:
------------------------------------

bq. I think we should remove it

Ok I will.

bq. It is unfortunate that the common case is often held back by the full 
flexibility/generality of the facet module

With LUCENE-4647, the common case suffers less from the full generality of the 
facets module. I'll open an issue to take care of FacetFields reusability and 
there I hope I'll be able to tackle successfully the reusability of BytesRefs 
for one as well as many CLPs.

IMO though, having a single entry point for users to index facets, be it 1 
facet per document, or 2500 (a real case!), is important. We need to make sure 
though that the 1 facet case is added the least overhead (e.g. using 
Collections.singletonMap, or the trick I've done in 
CountingListBuilder.OrdinalsEncoder (with/out partitions)).
                
> Explore IntEncoder/Decoder bulk API
> -----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-4620
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4620
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: modules/facet
>            Reporter: Shai Erera
>         Attachments: LUCENE-4620.patch, LUCENE-4620.patch, LUCENE-4620.patch
>
>
> Today, IntEncoder/Decoder offer a streaming API, where you can encode(int) 
> and decode(int). Originally, we believed that this layer can be useful for 
> other scenarios, but in practice it's used only for writing/reading the 
> category ordinals from payload/DV.
> Therefore, Mike and I would like to explore a bulk API, something like 
> encode(IntsRef, BytesRef) and decode(BytesRef, IntsRef). Perhaps the Encoder 
> can still be streaming (as we don't know in advance how many ints will be 
> written), dunno. Will figure this out as we go.
> One thing to check is whether the bulk API can work w/ e.g. facet 
> associations, which can write arbitrary byte[], and so may decoding to an 
> IntsRef won't make sense. This too we'll figure out as we go. I don't rule 
> out that associations will use a different bulk API.
> At the end of the day, the requirement is for someone to be able to configure 
> how ordinals are written (i.e. different encoding schemes: VInt, PackedInts 
> etc.) and later read, with as little overhead as possible.

--
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

Reply via email to