Some time ago I tried to introduce LUCENE-581, a new consumer top
layer, the core changes required by LUCENE-550, my InstantaitedIndex.
I would still like to see this a part of the core. It is completely
backwards compatible but contains a few small changes that seems to
be convtroversial, and I'm honestly not sure why:
* Complete definalization of Term, Document and IndexReader.
* IndexWriterInterface
In my eyes, the only thing these things do are to limit Lucene
development to the file-centric Directory store. There is nothing
wrong with Dicretory, I just want to be able to use the same code for
any store design of my chooise. I want unison index handling, no
matter the implementation. One line of code that switch between
Directory, BDB, MemoryIndex, InstantiatedIndex or what not.
This post is about InstantiatedIndex and the things I built upon it.
As time it passed I just gave up on keeping them up to date. It is in
use at this one place where it is just spinning on with no need to
update, stuck to Lucene 2.0 or so. We are now getting close to Lucene
3.0 and I would hate to see this code get lost in time.
It has so many neat features. Beeing really really fast on small
corpuses is just one.
In essense the design is similar to contrib/MemoryIndex, but it can
hold multiple documents.
The definalization and interface also allows for index insert/delete/
optimization notifications.
These two features combined yeilded in an active cache (not really
used in any project, just a proof-of-concept I experimented with on a
site where a lot of users place the exact same query) that update
cached results only when affected by new data. Could be done with
MemoryIndex too, but not as fast as InstantiatedIndex can handle
batches of documents.
One can however do alot of other things with it.
In LUCENE-626 I also use InstantiatedIndex, getting some 10-20 times
faster response times from my contrib/spellcheck augmentation than
when using a RAMDirectory.
There are more features and potentially cool things one might want to
consider in the 550-patch/UML diagram.
Would the changes to the core InstantiatedIndex require ever be
committed? Then I could sit down and bring these patches up to date.
Otherwise I'll just let them become some depricated artifact I use
for a couple of things such as spellchecking, rather than a neat
augmentation of Lucene I could use for any future development.
--
karl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
