[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12547524
]
Michael Busch commented on LUCENE-584:
--------------------------------------
{quote}
The patch is backwards compatible,
{quote}
I think that custom Searcher or Searchable implementations won't compile
anymore?
Because the signature of some abstract methods changed, e. g. in Searchable:
{code:java}
@@ -86,13 +86,14 @@
* <p>Called by [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hits}.
*
* <p>Applications should usually call [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Searcher#search(Query)} or
- * [EMAIL PROTECTED] Searcher#search(Query,Filter)} instead.
+ * [EMAIL PROTECTED] Searcher#search(Query,MatchFilter)} instead.
* @throws BooleanQuery.TooManyClauses
*/
- TopDocs search(Weight weight, Filter filter, int n) throws IOException;
+ TopDocs search(Weight weight, MatchFilter filter, int n) throws IOException;
{code}
> 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
> Assignee: Michael Busch
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: bench-diff.txt, bench-diff.txt, lucene-584.patch,
> Matcher-20070905-2default.patch, Matcher-20070905-3core.patch,
> Matcher-20071122-1ground.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]
