[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12557955#action_12557955
]
Paul Elschot commented on LUCENE-584:
-------------------------------------
I'm sorry about my PrefixGenerator remarks, I did not read your answer
accurately.
On the take4 patch of 11 Jan 2008:
I have started in a fresh trunk checkout that passed all tests.
Both parts of take4 apply cleanly, using patch -p0 < ... .
ant jar, ant test-core and ant test-contrib all pass nicely.
I remember having problems with moving contrib/xml-queryparser from Filter
to BitSetFilter, see my comment of 30 July 2007.
So I'd like to verify that this can be done, and I hope Mark Harwood can give
some hints as to how to do this.
For me, this was the main reason to make this move:
from Filter with subclass BitSetFilter (as in the take4 patch, and in my first
attempts)
to MatchFilter with subclass Filter (as in Matcher... patches of Sep and Nov
2007).
In these Matcher... patches no changes were necessary to
contrib/xml-queryparser.
Less important for now:
The test classes extend TestCase, but iirc there is also a LuceneTestCase for
this.
On the take4 patch ant javadocs-core gives this:
BitSetFilter.java:40: warning - Tag @link: reference not found:
DocIdBitSetIterator
> 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
> Fix For: 2.4
>
> Attachments: bench-diff.txt, bench-diff.txt, lucene-584-take2.patch,
> lucene-584-take3-part1.patch, lucene-584-take3-part2.patch,
> lucene-584-take4-part1.patch, lucene-584-take4-part2.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]
