[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1219?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12578253#action_12578253
]
Eks Dev commented on LUCENE-1219:
---------------------------------
>>Eks can you see if the changes look OK? Thanks.
It looks perfect, you have brought it to the "commit ready status" already.
I will it try it on our production mirror a bit later today and report back if
something goes wrong.
>>I guess I don't really understand the need for Fieldable. In fact I
also don't really understand why we even needed to add AbstractField.
I am with you 100% here, It looks to me as well that one concrete class could
replace it all. But... maybe someone kicks-in with some god arguments why we
have it that way.
> support array/offset/ length setters for Field with binary data
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1219
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1219
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Reporter: Eks Dev
> Assignee: Michael McCandless
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: LUCENE-1219.patch, LUCENE-1219.patch, LUCENE-1219.patch,
> LUCENE-1219.patch, LUCENE-1219.take2.patch
>
>
> currently Field/Fieldable interface supports only compact, zero based byte
> arrays. This forces end users to create and copy content of new objects
> before passing them to Lucene as such fields are often of variable size.
> Depending on use case, this can bring far from negligible performance
> improvement.
> this approach extends Fieldable interface with 3 new methods
> getOffset(); gettLenght(); and getBinaryValue() (this only returns reference
> to the array)
>
--
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]
