[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1340?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12615446#action_12615446
 ] 

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-1340:
--------------------------------------------

bq. About this one, it would be nice not to store this as well, but I think the 
pointers are already reduced to one byte, as they are 0 for these cases (are 
they,?) So we have this benefit without expecting it

Ahh, right.  The delta between the proxPointers are written as vlong's.  Since 
the delta will be zero it's now only 1 byte; only a bit worse than 0 bytes ;)

bq. that would mean we could easily "inline" very short postings into term dict 
(here I expect huge performance benefit, as skip() on another large file is 
going to be saved independent from omitTf(true))

Yes, this looks like it would be a win for cases that need to visit the 
postings for many small terms.

> Make it posible not to include TF information in index
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1340
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1340
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Index
>            Reporter: Eks Dev
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: LUCENE-1340.patch, LUCENE-1340.patch, LUCENE-1340.patch, 
> LUCENE-1340.patch, LUCENE-1340.patch
>
>   Original Estimate: 24h
>  Remaining Estimate: 24h
>
> Term Frequency is typically not needed  for all fields, some CPU (reading one 
> VInt less and one X>>>1...) and IO can be spared by making pure boolen fields 
> possible in Lucene. This topic has already been discussed and accepted as a 
> part of Flexible Indexing... This issue tries to push things a bit faster 
> forward as I have some concrete customer demands.
> benefits can be expected for fields that are typical candidates for Filters, 
> enumerations, user rights, IDs or very short "texts", phone  numbers, zip 
> codes, names...
> Status: just passed standard test (compatibility), commited for early review, 
> I have not tried new feature, missing some asserts and one two unit tests
> Complexity: simpler than expected
> can be used via omitTf() (who used omitNorms() will know where to find it :)  

-- 
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]

Reply via email to