[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12547988
]
Mark Harwood commented on LUCENE-584:
-------------------------------------
I'm getting lost as to which patches we're considering here. I was looking at
lucene-584-take2 patch.
MatcherProvider in the earlier patch does look like something that will help
with caching.
>>Would those be a good starting point?
Overall I feel uncomfortable with a lot of the classnames. I think the use of
"Matcher" says more about what you want to do with the class in this particular
case rather than what _it_ does generally. I have other uses in mind for these
classes that are outside of filtering search results. For me, these classes can
be thought of much more simply as utility classes in the same mould as the java
Collections API. Fundamentally, they are efficient implementations of
sets/lists of integers with support for iterators. The whole thing would be a
lot cleaner if classes were named around this scheme.
"MatcherProvider" for example is essentially a DocIdSet which creates forms of
DocIdSetIterators (Matchers) and could also usefully have a size() method.
> 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-take2.patch,
> 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]
