[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12523917
]
Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-584:
-------------------------------------
This set of patches indeed break backward compatibility with the current Filter
class.
That was done to show the ideal end situation, and to make sure that the
patched code is indeed there.
To get backward compatibility I'd prefer to temporarily copy the functionality
from BitSetFilter into the Filter class, while still leaving BitSetFilter as it
is:
public class Filter {
/** @deprecated use class BitSetFilter instead */
public abstract BitSet bits(IndexReader reader);
/** this method will become abstract once the bits() method is removed from
Filter: */
public Matcher getMatcher(IndexReader reader) {return
DefaultFilter.defaultFilter(bits(reader));}
}
The main difference between the current set of patches and the removed patches
is indicated
in my first comment of 25 July 2007 above.
I still have the older versions of the patch lying around here, so if you need
a particular one, just indicated the date, and I'll repost or send it.
> Decouple Filter from BitSet
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-584
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Search
> Affects Versions: 2.0.1
> Reporter: Peter Schäfer
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: bench-diff.txt, bench-diff.txt,
> Matcher1-ground-20070730.patch, Matcher2-default-20070730.patch,
> Matcher3-core-20070730.patch, Matcher4-contrib-misc-20070730.patch,
> Matcher5-contrib-queries-20070730.patch, Matcher6-contrib-xml-20070730.patch,
> Some Matchers.zip
>
>
> {code}
> package org.apache.lucene.search;
> public abstract class Filter implements java.io.Serializable
> {
> public abstract AbstractBitSet bits(IndexReader reader) throws IOException;
> }
> public interface AbstractBitSet
> {
> public boolean get(int index);
> }
> {code}
> It would be useful if the method =Filter.bits()= returned an abstract
> interface, instead of =java.util.BitSet=.
> Use case: there is a very large index, and, depending on the user's
> privileges, only a small portion of the index is actually visible.
> Sparsely populated =java.util.BitSet=s are not efficient and waste lots of
> memory. It would be desirable to have an alternative BitSet implementation
> with smaller memory footprint.
> Though it _is_ possibly to derive classes from =java.util.BitSet=, it was
> obviously not designed for that purpose.
> That's why I propose to use an interface instead. The default implementation
> could still delegate to =java.util.BitSet=.
--
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]
