rmuir commented on a change in pull request #606:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/606#discussion_r785220678
##########
File path:
lucene/facet/src/java/org/apache/lucene/facet/taxonomy/FastTaxonomyFacetCounts.java
##########
@@ -126,23 +126,39 @@ private void countAll(IndexReader reader) throws
IOException {
NumericDocValues singleValued = DocValues.unwrapSingleton(multiValued);
if (singleValued != null) {
- for (int doc = singleValued.nextDoc();
- doc != DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS;
- doc = singleValued.nextDoc()) {
- if (liveDocs != null && liveDocs.get(doc) == false) {
- continue;
+ if (liveDocs != null) {
+ for (int doc = singleValued.nextDoc();
+ doc != DocIdSetIterator.NO_MORE_DOCS;
+ doc = singleValued.nextDoc()) {
+ if (liveDocs.get(doc)) {
+ values[(int) singleValued.longValue()]++;
+ }
+ }
+ } else {
Review comment:
also, is there really a reason anymore to have count vs countAll? They
look the same to me. The only difference is livedocs check which is shown to do
nothing? So if we remove livedocs specialization, and remove count-vs-countAll
specialization, it should start to be a bit more manageable?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
