[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-662?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12479779
]
Grant Ingersoll commented on LUCENE-662:
----------------------------------------
Hi Nicolas,
I tried applying indexFormat.patch and am getting:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] patch -p 0 -i ../patches/indexFormat.patch --dry-run
patching file src/test/org/apache/lucene/store/IndexInputTest.java
patching file src/test/org/apache/lucene/index/DocHelper.java
patching file src/test/org/apache/lucene/index/TestIndexFormat.java
can't find file to patch at input line 369
Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|
|Property changes on: src/test/org/apache/lucene/index/TestIndexFormat.java
|___________________________________________________________________
|Name: svn:keywords
| + Date Revision Author HeadURL Id
|Name: svn:eol-style
| + native
|
|Index: src/test/org/apache/lucene/index/impl/TestSegmentTermDocs.java
|===================================================================
|--- src/test/org/apache/lucene/index/impl/TestSegmentTermDocs.java
(revision 0)
|+++ src/test/org/apache/lucene/index/impl/TestSegmentTermDocs.java
(working copy)
--------------------------
File to patch:
--------
Meaning, it doesn't know what to do with this diff. From the looks of it,
TestSegmentTermDocs.java did not get move to the impl directory from the
directory it was in.
I'm not sure how to handle this in SVN, but I suspect you have to do a local
copy move first. Perhaps try applying this patch to a clean checkout to let me
know if it works for you. Also, perhaps we can collaborate with Doron to write
up some benchmarks or to at least make sure the existing benchmarks are
covering this new way.
> Extendable writer and reader of field data
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-662
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-662
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Store
> Reporter: Nicolas Lalevée
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: entrytable.patch, generic-fieldIO-2.patch,
> generic-fieldIO-3.patch, generic-fieldIO-4.patch, generic-fieldIO-5.patch,
> generic-fieldIO.patch, indexFormat.patch
>
>
> As discussed on the dev mailing list, I have modified Lucene to allow to
> define how the data of a field is writen and read in the index.
> Basically, I have introduced the notion of IndexFormat. It is in fact a
> factory of FieldsWriter and FieldsReader. So the IndexReader, the indexWriter
> and the SegmentMerger are using this factory and not doing a "new
> FieldsReader/Writer()".
> I have also introduced the notion of FieldData. It handles every data of a
> field, and also the writing and the reading in a stream. I have done this way
> because in the current design of Lucene, Fiedable is an interface, so methods
> with a protected or package visibility cannot be defined.
> A FieldsWriter just writes data into a stream via the FieldData of the field.
> A FieldsReader instanciates a FieldData depending on the field name. Then it
> use the field data to read the stream. And finnaly it instanciates a Field
> with the field data.
> About compatibility, I think it is kept, as I have writen a
> DefaultIndexFormat that provides some DefaultFieldsWriter and
> DefaultFieldsReader. These implementations do the exact job that is done
> today.
> To acheive this modification, some classes and methods had to be moved from
> private and/or final to public or protected.
> About the lazy fields, I have implemented them in a more general way in the
> implementation of the abstract class FieldData, so it will be totally
> transparent for the Lucene user that will extends FieldData. The stream is
> kept in the fieldData and used as soon as the stringValue (or something else)
> is called. Implementing this way allowed me to handle the recently introduced
> LOAD_FOR_MERGE; it is just a lazy field data, and when read() is called on
> this lazy field data, the saved input stream is directly copied in the output
> stream.
> I have a last issue with this patch. The current design allow to read an
> index in an old format, and just do a writer.addIndexes() into a new format.
> With the new design, you cannot, because the writer will use the
> FieldData.write provided by the reader.
> enjoy !
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
